Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 22861 - 22870 of 74518 for public records.
Search results 22861 - 22870 of 74518 for public records.
[PDF]
WI APP 125
. Publication 525 (2002)”: “A recovery is a return of an amount you deducted or took a credit
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=28539 - 2014-09-15
. Publication 525 (2002)”: “A recovery is a return of an amount you deducted or took a credit
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=28539 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
State v. Kenneth L. Champion
prejudice to the defendant against the public's interest in avoiding unnecessary or duplicative trials
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=9641 - 2017-09-19
prejudice to the defendant against the public's interest in avoiding unnecessary or duplicative trials
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=9641 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
State v. Gregg S. Pate
procedures were inadequate; and (4) the sentence was excessive. Upon review of the record, we
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13431 - 2017-09-21
procedures were inadequate; and (4) the sentence was excessive. Upon review of the record, we
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13431 - 2017-09-21
State v. Gary A. Michels
to § 346.65(6). The record is unclear as to why the State did not exercise this authority. ¶13
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4672 - 2005-03-31
to § 346.65(6). The record is unclear as to why the State did not exercise this authority. ¶13
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4672 - 2005-03-31
Joseph Ermenc v. American Family Mutual Insurance Company
effect. See Rabalais, 671 So. 2d at 9. The record in this case does not support such a finding
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13665 - 2005-03-31
effect. See Rabalais, 671 So. 2d at 9. The record in this case does not support such a finding
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13665 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
David J. Winkel v.
2 ¶2 We determine that the public reprimand recommended by the referee is the appropriate
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=17200 - 2017-09-21
2 ¶2 We determine that the public reprimand recommended by the referee is the appropriate
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=17200 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
Nathaniel A. Lindell v. Jon E. Litscher
of a person’s parental rights on the ability to pay record preparation fees); Boddie v. Connecticut, 401 U.S
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=5285 - 2017-09-19
of a person’s parental rights on the ability to pay record preparation fees); Boddie v. Connecticut, 401 U.S
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=5285 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Clay F. Teasdale
Regulation (OLR) grievance investigation concerning his conduct. He has received two public reprimands
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=19616 - 2017-09-21
Regulation (OLR) grievance investigation concerning his conduct. He has received two public reprimands
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=19616 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
Lakisha Dahm v. City of Milwaukee
as “the Milwaukee Public School System.” Hope Dahm, on the other hand, contends that she, as Mr. Dahm’s first
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=20310 - 2017-09-21
as “the Milwaukee Public School System.” Hope Dahm, on the other hand, contends that she, as Mr. Dahm’s first
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=20310 - 2017-09-21
COURT OF APPEALS
resulting from a continuance granted at the request of the representative of the public under s. 48.09
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=34851 - 2008-12-11
resulting from a continuance granted at the request of the representative of the public under s. 48.09
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=34851 - 2008-12-11