Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 26551 - 26560 of 55817 for n y c.
Search results 26551 - 26560 of 55817 for n y c.
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
a judgment and an order of the circuit court for Milwaukee County: FREDERICK C. ROSA and DAVID A. FEISS
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1023384 - 2025-10-14
a judgment and an order of the circuit court for Milwaukee County: FREDERICK C. ROSA and DAVID A. FEISS
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1023384 - 2025-10-14
[PDF]
Douglas County Child Support Enforcement Unit for Dianne Niemi v. Robert P. Fisher
original motion was filed pursuant to § 767.30(3)(c), STATS., to determine the amount of arrearages
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=9382 - 2017-09-19
original motion was filed pursuant to § 767.30(3)(c), STATS., to determine the amount of arrearages
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=9382 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
and for 1 This appeal is decided by one judge pursuant to WIS. STAT. § 752.31(2)(c) (2023-24). All
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=936463 - 2025-04-03
and for 1 This appeal is decided by one judge pursuant to WIS. STAT. § 752.31(2)(c) (2023-24). All
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=936463 - 2025-04-03
William J. Keefe v. Ronald A. Arthur
pursuant to Wis. Stat. § 806.07(1)(c), (1)(h) and (2) (2003-04).[5] The Keefes argued that the Arthurs had
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=19964 - 2005-10-17
pursuant to Wis. Stat. § 806.07(1)(c), (1)(h) and (2) (2003-04).[5] The Keefes argued that the Arthurs had
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=19964 - 2005-10-17
[PDF]
State v. Thomas A. Greve
under WIS. STAT. § 939.62(2m)(c). He filed a timely request under WIS. STAT. § 971.20(4
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=3995 - 2017-09-20
under WIS. STAT. § 939.62(2m)(c). He filed a timely request under WIS. STAT. § 971.20(4
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=3995 - 2017-09-20
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
apparent that the parties rely on the summary judgment standard because they ask the [c]ourt to take
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=685833 - 2023-08-08
apparent that the parties rely on the summary judgment standard because they ask the [c]ourt to take
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=685833 - 2023-08-08
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
and for 1 This appeal is decided by one judge pursuant to WIS. STAT. § 752.31(2)(c) (2023-24). All
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=936463 - 2025-04-03
and for 1 This appeal is decided by one judge pursuant to WIS. STAT. § 752.31(2)(c) (2023-24). All
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=936463 - 2025-04-03
[PDF]
State v. Randolph P. Haushalter
. APPEAL from judgments of the circuit court for Milwaukee County: ROBERT C. CRAWFORD, Judge. Reversed
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15124 - 2017-09-21
. APPEAL from judgments of the circuit court for Milwaukee County: ROBERT C. CRAWFORD, Judge. Reversed
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15124 - 2017-09-21
COURT OF APPEALS
. Langston C. Austin, Defendant-Appellant. Opinion Filed: July 30, 2013
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=100067 - 2013-09-23
. Langston C. Austin, Defendant-Appellant. Opinion Filed: July 30, 2013
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=100067 - 2013-09-23
[PDF]
Foremost Farms USA v. Shelly Zettler
under WIS. ADMIN. CODE § ATCP 60.19(10)(c), and therefore these results are inadmissible. Section
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=7050 - 2017-09-20
under WIS. ADMIN. CODE § ATCP 60.19(10)(c), and therefore these results are inadmissible. Section
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=7050 - 2017-09-20