Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 24351 - 24360 of 37909 for d's.
Search results 24351 - 24360 of 37909 for d's.
State v. Eric J. Yelk
Yelk’s claim because at the plea hearing Yelk confirmed that he “ha[d] enough time to discuss
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=11853 - 2005-03-31
Yelk’s claim because at the plea hearing Yelk confirmed that he “ha[d] enough time to discuss
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=11853 - 2005-03-31
State v. Eric J. Yelk
Yelk’s claim because at the plea hearing Yelk confirmed that he “ha[d] enough time to discuss
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=11852 - 2005-03-31
Yelk’s claim because at the plea hearing Yelk confirmed that he “ha[d] enough time to discuss
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=11852 - 2005-03-31
State v. Kenneth J. Smith
of James D. Doyle, attorney general and Thomas J. Balistreri, assistant attorney general. COURT
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9578 - 2005-03-31
of James D. Doyle, attorney general and Thomas J. Balistreri, assistant attorney general. COURT
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9578 - 2005-03-31
Village of Linden v. Todd N. Nagel
from judgments of the circuit court for Iowa County: william d. dyke, Judge. Affirmed
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15593 - 2005-03-31
from judgments of the circuit court for Iowa County: william d. dyke, Judge. Affirmed
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15593 - 2005-03-31
Village of Linden v. Todd N. Nagel
from judgments of the circuit court for Iowa County: william d. dyke, Judge. Affirmed
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15594 - 2005-03-31
from judgments of the circuit court for Iowa County: william d. dyke, Judge. Affirmed
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15594 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
for Washburn County: EUGENE D. HARRINGTON, Judge. Affirmed in part; reversed in part, and cause remanded
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=59541 - 2011-01-31
for Washburn County: EUGENE D. HARRINGTON, Judge. Affirmed in part; reversed in part, and cause remanded
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=59541 - 2011-01-31
COURT OF APPEALS
without first knowing whether that information is “substantially relate[d] to the circumstances
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=50274 - 2010-05-24
without first knowing whether that information is “substantially relate[d] to the circumstances
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=50274 - 2010-05-24
COURT OF APPEALS
by one judge pursuant to Wis. Stat. § 752.31(2)(d) (2007-08). All references to the Wisconsin Statutes
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=36830 - 2009-06-17
by one judge pursuant to Wis. Stat. § 752.31(2)(d) (2007-08). All references to the Wisconsin Statutes
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=36830 - 2009-06-17
Elizabeth H. Taylor v. James A. Taylor
of maintenance under 26 U.S.C. § 71(b)(1)(D). Even accepting Elizabeth's concession
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9911 - 2005-03-31
of maintenance under 26 U.S.C. § 71(b)(1)(D). Even accepting Elizabeth's concession
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9911 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND FILED December 5, 2006 Cornelia G. Clark Clerk of Court of A...
is different than a stipulation controlled by § 807.05.” The City further argues the “[d]efendant has no right
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=27332 - 2006-12-04
is different than a stipulation controlled by § 807.05.” The City further argues the “[d]efendant has no right
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=27332 - 2006-12-04