Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 2361 - 2370 of 50652 for writ of certiorari forms.
Search results 2361 - 2370 of 50652 for writ of certiorari forms.
2008 WI APP 107
a previous order dismissing as untimely its request for certiorari review. The circuit court found that HCRG
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=33134 - 2008-07-29
a previous order dismissing as untimely its request for certiorari review. The circuit court found that HCRG
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=33134 - 2008-07-29
[PDF]
WI App 51
as a certiorari review of the Village ZBA’s decision to uphold the Village Board’s vote, our review turns
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=558953 - 2022-10-10
as a certiorari review of the Village ZBA’s decision to uphold the Village Board’s vote, our review turns
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=558953 - 2022-10-10
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
sought certiorari review of the Board’s decision in the circuit court. The court affirmed the Zoning
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=956363 - 2025-06-25
sought certiorari review of the Board’s decision in the circuit court. The court affirmed the Zoning
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=956363 - 2025-06-25
Robert J. Auchinleck v. Town of LaGrange
that the circuit court did not have jurisdiction to conduct a certiorari review and that the court erred
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14448 - 2005-03-31
that the circuit court did not have jurisdiction to conduct a certiorari review and that the court erred
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14448 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
Robert J. Auchinleck v. Town of LaGrange
argues on appeal that the circuit court did not have jurisdiction to conduct a certiorari review
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=14448 - 2017-09-21
argues on appeal that the circuit court did not have jurisdiction to conduct a certiorari review
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=14448 - 2017-09-21
William J. Evers v. Dennis C. Luebke
failure to respond to Evers’ petition for a writ of habeas corpus. The trial court dismissed the suit
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=11737 - 2005-03-31
failure to respond to Evers’ petition for a writ of habeas corpus. The trial court dismissed the suit
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=11737 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
William J. Evers v. Dennis C. Luebke
under § 782.09, STATS., for Judge Luebke’s failure to respond to Evers’ petition for a writ of habeas
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=11737 - 2017-09-20
under § 782.09, STATS., for Judge Luebke’s failure to respond to Evers’ petition for a writ of habeas
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=11737 - 2017-09-20
COURT OF APPEALS
was not a certiorari action but, rather, was timely commenced under Wis. Stat. § 74.37.[1] We reject Slocum’s
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=112631 - 2014-05-19
was not a certiorari action but, rather, was timely commenced under Wis. Stat. § 74.37.[1] We reject Slocum’s
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=112631 - 2014-05-19
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
argues there is new evidence showing that his original challenge was not a certiorari
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=112631 - 2017-09-21
argues there is new evidence showing that his original challenge was not a certiorari
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=112631 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
for a writ of habeas corpus. Clincy argues that the No. 2016AP1317 2 circuit court erred
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=204468 - 2017-12-06
for a writ of habeas corpus. Clincy argues that the No. 2016AP1317 2 circuit court erred
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=204468 - 2017-12-06