Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 27621 - 27630 of 60173 for quit claim deed/1000.

COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND FILED November 30, 2006 Cornelia G. Clark Clerk of Court of ...
Bituminous filed a complaint alleging a subrogated property damage claim against Staab Construction
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=27289 - 2006-11-29

State v. David G. Grimm
claim that he was not driving his car as the arresting officer claimed. Essentially, Grimm is arguing
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9124 - 2005-03-31

Martha Sue Gatten v. Eileen Perket
to the Wisconsin Statutes are to the 2003-04 version unless otherwise noted. [2] Gatten makes additional claims
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=25937 - 2005-03-31

COURT OF APPEALS
, common sense demands that the appellant claim some reviewable error occurred during the missing portion
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=60262 - 2011-02-22

Harter's Quick Clean Up, Inc. v. LIRC
to be compensable. The issue before the commission related to Tirado’s claim that he suffered a herniated disc
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=26337 - 2006-08-30

Kurt Ohrmundt v. Greg Demark
claims that the trial court erred in granting summary judgment because there are material issues
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13610 - 2005-03-31

COURT OF APPEALS
, appeals pro se from an order that denied his motion for resentencing. He claims that his twenty-year
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=59173 - 2011-01-24

State v. Eugene Nichols
to §§ 943.20(1)(a), 943.20(3)(a), 943.11, 943.01 and 939.05, Stats. He claims that the trial court erroneously
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10743 - 2005-03-31

Robin Gaertner v. Gertruda Holcka
to as Catholic Mutual) motion for summary judgment upon Catholic Mutual's cross-claim for contribution against
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=17157 - 2005-03-31

State v. John Foster Fant
; and (6) whether the claim of privacy is consistent with historical notions of privacy. See State v
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13116 - 2005-03-31