Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 31751 - 31760 of 97782 for civil court case status online.
Search results 31751 - 31760 of 97782 for civil court case status online.
COURT OF APPEALS
predecessor AT&T was a creditor in Mr. Wolfinger’s Chapter 13 bankruptcy case; (3) the circuit court
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=137262 - 2015-03-11
predecessor AT&T was a creditor in Mr. Wolfinger’s Chapter 13 bankruptcy case; (3) the circuit court
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=137262 - 2015-03-11
COURT OF APPEALS
—their daughter’s preference. ¶16 The circuit court in this case did not expressly discuss all of the custody
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=91486 - 2013-01-09
—their daughter’s preference. ¶16 The circuit court in this case did not expressly discuss all of the custody
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=91486 - 2013-01-09
COURT OF APPEALS
COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND FILED December 7, 2011 A. John Voelker Acting Clerk
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=74678 - 2011-12-06
COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND FILED December 7, 2011 A. John Voelker Acting Clerk
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=74678 - 2011-12-06
COURT OF APPEALS
COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND FILED November 23, 2010 A. John Voelker Acting Clerk
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=56839 - 2010-11-22
COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND FILED November 23, 2010 A. John Voelker Acting Clerk
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=56839 - 2010-11-22
COURT OF APPEALS
. In this case, the court never performed a Sullivan analysis because it reasonably concluded it did not have
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=89596 - 2012-11-26
. In this case, the court never performed a Sullivan analysis because it reasonably concluded it did not have
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=89596 - 2012-11-26
COURT OF APPEALS
COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND FILED April 27, 2010 David R. Schanker Clerk of Court
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=49275 - 2010-04-26
COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND FILED April 27, 2010 David R. Schanker Clerk of Court
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=49275 - 2010-04-26
COURT OF APPEALS
., the case was called. Neither the Kalugins nor their counsel appeared. The court granted Manchester’s
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=33249 - 2008-06-30
., the case was called. Neither the Kalugins nor their counsel appeared. The court granted Manchester’s
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=33249 - 2008-06-30
COURT OF APPEALS
, we will not overturn a trial court’s findings of fact about the circumstances of the case, including
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=39049 - 2009-08-10
, we will not overturn a trial court’s findings of fact about the circumstances of the case, including
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=39049 - 2009-08-10
COURT OF APPEALS
coverage. The court therefore entered a judgment dismissing Farmers and Pekin from the case and declaring
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=107438 - 2014-01-27
coverage. The court therefore entered a judgment dismissing Farmers and Pekin from the case and declaring
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=107438 - 2014-01-27
COURT OF APPEALS
is credible. Rather, the circuit court performs its duty. ¶10 In this case, the circuit court assessed
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=116865 - 2014-08-11
is credible. Rather, the circuit court performs its duty. ¶10 In this case, the circuit court assessed
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=116865 - 2014-08-11