Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 2451 - 2460 of 65039 for timed.
Search results 2451 - 2460 of 65039 for timed.
COURT OF APPEALS
time frame, his appeal might be timely. See State ex rel. Nichols v. Litscher, 2001 WI 119, ¶32, 247
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=49478 - 2010-05-03
time frame, his appeal might be timely. See State ex rel. Nichols v. Litscher, 2001 WI 119, ¶32, 247
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=49478 - 2010-05-03
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
was “deferred” on several occasions since that time, and under the old sentencing laws, circuit courts
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=836705 - 2024-08-13
was “deferred” on several occasions since that time, and under the old sentencing laws, circuit courts
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=836705 - 2024-08-13
Marlene A. Freitag v. Scott D. Freitag
. At the time of divorce, Scott, thirty-eight, earned $4,450 per month as a farmer. Marlene, forty, earned $l
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13757 - 2005-03-31
. At the time of divorce, Scott, thirty-eight, earned $4,450 per month as a farmer. Marlene, forty, earned $l
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13757 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
WI 7
violated his duty to act with reasonable diligence by failing to file a timely appeal (Count 4
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=46692 - 2014-09-15
violated his duty to act with reasonable diligence by failing to file a timely appeal (Count 4
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=46692 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
Manitowoc County v. Denise G.
concluded that this court has no authority to extend the time to file a notice of intent to appeal
/ca/errata/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=9938 - 2017-09-19
concluded that this court has no authority to extend the time to file a notice of intent to appeal
/ca/errata/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=9938 - 2017-09-19
State v. Marshal G. Eske
and was granted ninety-one days of presentence credit under § 973.155, Stats. In addition to jail time
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12048 - 2005-03-31
and was granted ninety-one days of presentence credit under § 973.155, Stats. In addition to jail time
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12048 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
FICE OF THE CLERK
for summary disposition. See WIS. STAT. RULE 809.21(1). Roberts’ § 806.07 motion was not timely and we
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=94659 - 2014-09-15
for summary disposition. See WIS. STAT. RULE 809.21(1). Roberts’ § 806.07 motion was not timely and we
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=94659 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
Laura E.B. v. Robert M.C.
to Robert. Robert argues that the circuit court erred in failing to consider the shared-time formula
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=12762 - 2017-09-21
to Robert. Robert argues that the circuit court erred in failing to consider the shared-time formula
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=12762 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
State v. Gary Klatt
: “At about this same time, [Klatt] was convicted of one count of unarmed robbery and one count
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=11353 - 2017-09-19
: “At about this same time, [Klatt] was convicted of one count of unarmed robbery and one count
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=11353 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
NOTICE
alleged that based on Milwaukee Safeguard’s failure to timely comply with the scheduling order, its
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=55129 - 2014-09-15
alleged that based on Milwaukee Safeguard’s failure to timely comply with the scheduling order, its
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=55129 - 2014-09-15