Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 26311 - 26320 of 76965 for judgment for u s.
Search results 26311 - 26320 of 76965 for judgment for u s.
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
, the State filed a petition to terminate O.F.’s parental rights to J.G.R.2 The petition alleged that O.F
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=610816 - 2023-01-18
, the State filed a petition to terminate O.F.’s parental rights to J.G.R.2 The petition alleged that O.F
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=610816 - 2023-01-18
COURT OF APPEALS
, but that on May 20, 1985, M.S.’s enlistment was extended at the request of the federal government
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=96858 - 2013-05-15
, but that on May 20, 1985, M.S.’s enlistment was extended at the request of the federal government
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=96858 - 2013-05-15
State v. Virtis A.
. A jury agreed with the State that there were grounds to terminate Virtis A.’s parental rights
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6667 - 2005-03-31
. A jury agreed with the State that there were grounds to terminate Virtis A.’s parental rights
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6667 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
. 2021AP816 2021AP817 3 BACKGROUND ¶2 The State petitioned to terminate L.I.’s parental rights
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=402687 - 2021-08-04
. 2021AP816 2021AP817 3 BACKGROUND ¶2 The State petitioned to terminate L.I.’s parental rights
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=402687 - 2021-08-04
[PDF]
State v. Virtis A.
with the State that there were grounds to terminate Virtis A.’s parental rights to the children when it found
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=6666 - 2017-09-20
with the State that there were grounds to terminate Virtis A.’s parental rights to the children when it found
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=6666 - 2017-09-20
[PDF]
WI App 55
of the records, MEA and Prehn filed cross-motions for summary judgment. MEA argued in its motion that because
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=990122 - 2025-10-09
of the records, MEA and Prehn filed cross-motions for summary judgment. MEA argued in its motion that because
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=990122 - 2025-10-09
COURT OF APPEALS
. APPEALS and CROSS-APPEALS from a judgment of the circuit court for Iowa County: robert p. vandehey, Judge
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=111808 - 2014-05-07
. APPEALS and CROSS-APPEALS from a judgment of the circuit court for Iowa County: robert p. vandehey, Judge
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=111808 - 2014-05-07
[PDF]
Date: September 22, 2025
On September 23, 2025 Opinion Case Number Short Caption CountyName 2024AP002532 S. S. v. A. S.-P. Brown
/ca/mitl/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1015296 - 2025-09-21
On September 23, 2025 Opinion Case Number Short Caption CountyName 2024AP002532 S. S. v. A. S.-P. Brown
/ca/mitl/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1015296 - 2025-09-21
[PDF]
Response Brief per CTO of 11-27-21 (Congressmen)
The Standards In Johnson ........ 16 II. If This Court Wishes To Retain District 3’s Narrow Appendage
/courts/supreme/origact/docs/respbriefcongressmen2.pdf - 2022-01-03
The Standards In Johnson ........ 16 II. If This Court Wishes To Retain District 3’s Narrow Appendage
/courts/supreme/origact/docs/respbriefcongressmen2.pdf - 2022-01-03
[MS WORD]
JC-1611: Dispositional Order - Protection or Services (Chapter 48)
was held on [Date] , which is the effective date of this Order. The parent(s) are: Parent #1’s
/formdisplay/JC-1611.doc?formNumber=JC-1611&formType=Form&formatId=1&language=en - 2025-05-20
was held on [Date] , which is the effective date of this Order. The parent(s) are: Parent #1’s
/formdisplay/JC-1611.doc?formNumber=JC-1611&formType=Form&formatId=1&language=en - 2025-05-20