Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 2341 - 2350 of 45120 for Cost-effective.
Search results 2341 - 2350 of 45120 for Cost-effective.
COURT OF APPEALS
by her employer. She requested confirmation that Thomas would cover her health insurance costs. Shelly
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=48250 - 2010-03-22
by her employer. She requested confirmation that Thomas would cover her health insurance costs. Shelly
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=48250 - 2010-03-22
Frontsheet
. The Office of Lawyer Regulation (OLR) does not seek costs. No costs will be imposed. ¶3 Attorney Stern has
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=97131 - 2013-05-20
. The Office of Lawyer Regulation (OLR) does not seek costs. No costs will be imposed. ¶3 Attorney Stern has
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=97131 - 2013-05-20
2010 WI App 13
attorney fees and costs incurred in successfully opposing Microsoft’s appeal, we remand for a hearing
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=44865 - 2010-01-26
attorney fees and costs incurred in successfully opposing Microsoft’s appeal, we remand for a hearing
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=44865 - 2010-01-26
[PDF]
WI App 13
and costs incurred in successfully opposing Microsoft’s appeal, we remand for a hearing before the trial
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=44865 - 2014-09-15
and costs incurred in successfully opposing Microsoft’s appeal, we remand for a hearing before the trial
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=44865 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
WI 42
forth herein. We direct that the costs of the reinstatement proceeding, which total $7,827.83
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=65891 - 2014-09-15
forth herein. We direct that the costs of the reinstatement proceeding, which total $7,827.83
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=65891 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Christopher L. O'Byrne
to pay the costs of the proceeding. No. 02-1374-D 2 ¶2 We determine
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=16627 - 2017-09-21
to pay the costs of the proceeding. No. 02-1374-D 2 ¶2 We determine
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=16627 - 2017-09-21
Frontsheet
conditions on his reinstatement as set forth herein. We direct that the costs of the reinstatement
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=65891 - 2011-06-14
conditions on his reinstatement as set forth herein. We direct that the costs of the reinstatement
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=65891 - 2011-06-14
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
before the jury, including opinion evidence, cost, use, cost of restoration, ease or likelihood
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=252147 - 2020-01-07
before the jury, including opinion evidence, cost, use, cost of restoration, ease or likelihood
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=252147 - 2020-01-07
Frontsheet
costs of this disciplinary proceeding, which were $27,689.29 as of November 19, 2012. ¶2 After fully
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=96302 - 2013-05-01
costs of this disciplinary proceeding, which were $27,689.29 as of November 19, 2012. ¶2 After fully
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=96302 - 2013-05-01
[PDF]
WI 32
the recommended sanction, asserting that revocation is appropriate. The OLR seeks assessment of the full costs
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=95595 - 2014-09-15
the recommended sanction, asserting that revocation is appropriate. The OLR seeks assessment of the full costs
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=95595 - 2014-09-15