Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 31101 - 31110 of 62360 for child support.
Search results 31101 - 31110 of 62360 for child support.
COURT OF APPEALS
court’s findings of facts are upheld unless clearly erroneous and not supported by the record. See Gerth
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=77700 - 2012-02-07
court’s findings of facts are upheld unless clearly erroneous and not supported by the record. See Gerth
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=77700 - 2012-02-07
Kathleen Sanchez v. William R. Rude
; and the evidence was insufficient to support the verdict. We reject Rude’s claims for the reasons discussed below
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6705 - 2012-10-15
; and the evidence was insufficient to support the verdict. We reject Rude’s claims for the reasons discussed below
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6705 - 2012-10-15
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
of Seidling’s claims, we would need to scour the entire record, find supporting facts, research supporting law
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1017718 - 2025-09-30
of Seidling’s claims, we would need to scour the entire record, find supporting facts, research supporting law
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1017718 - 2025-09-30
State v. Steven P. Muckerheide
. In support of this theory, Muckerheide sought to introduce evidence that the victim had engaged in similar
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=24520 - 2011-03-01
. In support of this theory, Muckerheide sought to introduce evidence that the victim had engaged in similar
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=24520 - 2011-03-01
COURT OF APPEALS
not have an objectively reasonable basis to believe someone else was in the residence to support
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=117797 - 2014-06-24
not have an objectively reasonable basis to believe someone else was in the residence to support
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=117797 - 2014-06-24
James R. Kersten v. Board of Adjustment of the Town of Fulton
it. The appellants also argue that the board's decision was supported by "nothing" in the record. We apply
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10231 - 2011-09-21
it. The appellants also argue that the board's decision was supported by "nothing" in the record. We apply
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10231 - 2011-09-21
Mack J. Holt, Jr. v. National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh
playing basketball.[1] The YMCA argues that the evidence was insufficient to support the verdict because
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12692 - 2005-03-31
playing basketball.[1] The YMCA argues that the evidence was insufficient to support the verdict because
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12692 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
the law. He also argues that the prosecutor violated the plea agreement and that the facts do not support
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=34196 - 2008-10-01
the law. He also argues that the prosecutor violated the plea agreement and that the facts do not support
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=34196 - 2008-10-01
State v. Patrick T. Glover
denied Glover’s motion to suppress, finding that reasonable suspicion supported the stop and probable
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=20709 - 2005-12-20
denied Glover’s motion to suppress, finding that reasonable suspicion supported the stop and probable
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=20709 - 2005-12-20
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
that there is no arguable merit to challenging the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the verdicts. Appellate
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=675084 - 2023-07-05
that there is no arguable merit to challenging the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the verdicts. Appellate
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=675084 - 2023-07-05