Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 27001 - 27010 of 60169 for quit claim deed/1000.

Frontsheet
for misconduct committed in connection with two cases. One involved a possible small claims action over unpaid
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=33321 - 2008-07-07

Ogden Development Group, Inc. v. Dolores M. Buchel
for a zoning variance. Ogden claims that the Chairperson of the Board, Christine Swannell, although she
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=11397 - 2005-03-31

[PDF] State v. Larry A. Peterson
claims that he could not have done this because he suffers from severe back problems. Peterson's trial
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=3399 - 2017-09-19

[PDF] State v. David Lee Miller
months elapsed between commencement of this proceeding and Miller’s trial. Miller claims the delay
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=25540 - 2017-09-21

[PDF] COURT OF APPEALS
the same sentence.2 These contentions are nothing more than a claim that the sentencing court
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=77975 - 2014-09-15

[PDF] Delores Hoffman v. Memorial Hospital of Iowa County
764 (1994). The court quoted Rineck, noting: "Chapter 655 sets tort claims produced by medical
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=8121 - 2017-09-19

Randall G. Bobholz v. John Banaszak
ROGGENSACK, J.[1] John Banaszak appeals a small claims judgment awarding Randall and Doris Bobholz damages
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=5235 - 2005-03-31

COURT OF APPEALS
in the light most favorable to the party opposing the motion. Id., ¶23. DISCUSSION ¶10 A claim
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=48500 - 2010-03-31

WI App 46 court of appeals of wisconsin published opinion Case No.: 2012AP2692-CR Complete Title...
the burden of persuasion upon the State regardless of whether the defendant claims to be competent
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=109975 - 2014-05-27

COURT OF APPEALS
are nothing more than a claim that the sentencing court erroneously exercised its sentencing discretion
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=77975 - 2012-02-13