Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 2771 - 2780 of 83771 for simple case search/1000.
Search results 2771 - 2780 of 83771 for simple case search/1000.
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
No.2020CF2686. Moreover, the circuit court committed a simple error when it misspoke with regard to the case
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=781130 - 2024-04-02
No.2020CF2686. Moreover, the circuit court committed a simple error when it misspoke with regard to the case
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=781130 - 2024-04-02
Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Leo Barron Hicks
2004 WI 12 Supreme Court of Wisconsin Case No.: 02-2197-D Complete Title
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=16662 - 2005-03-31
2004 WI 12 Supreme Court of Wisconsin Case No.: 02-2197-D Complete Title
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=16662 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Leo Barron Hicks
2004 WI 12 SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN CASE NO.: 02-2197-D COMPLETE TITLE
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=16662 - 2017-09-21
2004 WI 12 SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN CASE NO.: 02-2197-D COMPLETE TITLE
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=16662 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
SC Table of Pending Cases - Added the decision in case no. 2017AP1894-CR
December 6, 2019 WISCONSIN SUPREME COURT TABLE OF PENDING CASES Clerk of Supreme Court
/sc/sccase/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=251121 - 2019-12-06
December 6, 2019 WISCONSIN SUPREME COURT TABLE OF PENDING CASES Clerk of Supreme Court
/sc/sccase/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=251121 - 2019-12-06
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
.” LaCrosse was also ordered to pay “simple interest at the rate of 1.5[%]” on any unpaid child support
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=188816 - 2017-09-21
.” LaCrosse was also ordered to pay “simple interest at the rate of 1.5[%]” on any unpaid child support
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=188816 - 2017-09-21
COURT OF APPEALS
). The “sentence imposed in each case should call for the minimum amount of custody or confinement which
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=28635 - 2007-04-02
). The “sentence imposed in each case should call for the minimum amount of custody or confinement which
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=28635 - 2007-04-02
State v. Mark A. Johnson
because the June case had not yet been adjudicated. On March 15, 2002, Johnson was convicted on the June
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6392 - 2005-03-31
because the June case had not yet been adjudicated. On March 15, 2002, Johnson was convicted on the June
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6392 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
NOTICE
omitted). The “sentence imposed in each case should call for the minimum amount of custody
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=28635 - 2014-09-15
omitted). The “sentence imposed in each case should call for the minimum amount of custody
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=28635 - 2014-09-15
State v. Roger A. Brainard
of the evidence in a Chapter 980 case under the same standard applicable to criminal convictions—that is, whether
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=7352 - 2005-03-31
of the evidence in a Chapter 980 case under the same standard applicable to criminal convictions—that is, whether
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=7352 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
State v. Mark A. Johnson
because the June case had not yet been adjudicated. On March 15, 2002, Johnson was convicted
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=6392 - 2017-09-19
because the June case had not yet been adjudicated. On March 15, 2002, Johnson was convicted
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=6392 - 2017-09-19