Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 29751 - 29760 of 58267 for speedy trial.
Search results 29751 - 29760 of 58267 for speedy trial.
State v. David J.M.
the trial court’s findings unless they are against the great weight and clear preponderance of the evidence
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13881 - 2005-03-31
the trial court’s findings unless they are against the great weight and clear preponderance of the evidence
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13881 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
] Michael Brault appeals the circuit court’s judgment convicting Brault, after a bench trial, of a municipal
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=139959 - 2015-04-15
] Michael Brault appeals the circuit court’s judgment convicting Brault, after a bench trial, of a municipal
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=139959 - 2015-04-15
James Munroe v. Dykstra
contends that the trial court erred in granting summary judgment to the State because he had filed a notice
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=11628 - 2005-03-31
contends that the trial court erred in granting summary judgment to the State because he had filed a notice
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=11628 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
State v. Mark J. Tilot
for a new trial. BACKGROUND ¶2 At approximately 2 a.m. on August 24, 2003, off-duty Brown County
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=19980 - 2017-09-21
for a new trial. BACKGROUND ¶2 At approximately 2 a.m. on August 24, 2003, off-duty Brown County
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=19980 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
State v. Wayne Cornelius
§§ 940.01(1)(a), 943.32(2) and 939.32. 1 Cornelius argues that the evidence at trial did not support his
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=18658 - 2017-09-21
§§ 940.01(1)(a), 943.32(2) and 939.32. 1 Cornelius argues that the evidence at trial did not support his
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=18658 - 2017-09-21
State v. Vincent Angiolo
to §§ 943.20(1)(a) and (3)(c), and 939.05, Stats. Angiolo argues that the trial court erred by denying his
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10228 - 2005-03-31
to §§ 943.20(1)(a) and (3)(c), and 939.05, Stats. Angiolo argues that the trial court erred by denying his
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10228 - 2005-03-31
State v. Kurt R. Caldwell
contends that the trial court erroneously exercised its discretion by basing its rejection of Caldwell’s
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=18130 - 2005-05-16
contends that the trial court erroneously exercised its discretion by basing its rejection of Caldwell’s
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=18130 - 2005-05-16
John O. Shaline v. State Farm Fire and Casualty Company
damage to their apartment building. State Farm contends that the trial court erroneously interpreted
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=3728 - 2005-03-31
damage to their apartment building. State Farm contends that the trial court erroneously interpreted
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=3728 - 2005-03-31
Marvin J. Theis v. Ford Motor Company
] On June 3, 1996, the Theises moved for summary judgment on their lemon law claim. At a pre-trial
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=11755 - 2014-01-05
] On June 3, 1996, the Theises moved for summary judgment on their lemon law claim. At a pre-trial
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=11755 - 2014-01-05
Choice Products v. Paul Tague
. (collectively "the Tagues").[1] Choice argues that the trial court misapplied the law in construing
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15068 - 2005-03-31
. (collectively "the Tagues").[1] Choice argues that the trial court misapplied the law in construing
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15068 - 2005-03-31