Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 3231 - 3240 of 64729 for b's.
Search results 3231 - 3240 of 64729 for b's.
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
(2)(b)10. and (d) respectively provide that “the term of confinement in prison may not exceed 75
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=109909 - 2017-09-21
(2)(b)10. and (d) respectively provide that “the term of confinement in prison may not exceed 75
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=109909 - 2017-09-21
Rowan L. Wardle v. Alec G. Newman
an order of the circuit court for Dane County: Sarah B. O’Brien, Judge. Affirmed. Before
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=7255 - 2005-03-31
an order of the circuit court for Dane County: Sarah B. O’Brien, Judge. Affirmed. Before
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=7255 - 2005-03-31
Colleen Lundberg v. North Medical Transportation
of the notice under § 893.80(1)(b), Stats. They claimed that they had no knowledge of any involvement
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9420 - 2005-03-31
of the notice under § 893.80(1)(b), Stats. They claimed that they had no knowledge of any involvement
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9420 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
(1)(b). Whether to reopen the judgment is a matter for the circuit court’s discretion; we
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=92329 - 2013-02-05
(1)(b). Whether to reopen the judgment is a matter for the circuit court’s discretion; we
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=92329 - 2013-02-05
[PDF]
Colleen Lundberg v. North Medical Transportation
of the notice under § 893.80(1)(b), STATS. They claimed that they had no knowledge of any involvement
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=9420 - 2017-09-19
of the notice under § 893.80(1)(b), STATS. They claimed that they had no knowledge of any involvement
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=9420 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
. 2 On this appeal, Odems also argues that WIS. STAT. § 973.014(1)(b) is an ex post facto violation
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=239174 - 2019-04-17
. 2 On this appeal, Odems also argues that WIS. STAT. § 973.014(1)(b) is an ex post facto violation
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=239174 - 2019-04-17
State v. Brady B.
of Brady B., A Person Under the Age of 17: State of Wisconsin, Petitioner
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14191 - 2005-03-31
of Brady B., A Person Under the Age of 17: State of Wisconsin, Petitioner
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14191 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
SCR CHAPTER 72
of entry of final order or judgment for all other small claims cases not specified in pars. (a), (b
/sc/scrule/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=978748 - 2025-07-01
of entry of final order or judgment for all other small claims cases not specified in pars. (a), (b
/sc/scrule/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=978748 - 2025-07-01
2007 WI APP 10
contract with them claiming a right to do so under Wis. Stat. § 631.11(1)(b) (2003-04).[1] The Pums sued
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=27590 - 2007-02-06
contract with them claiming a right to do so under Wis. Stat. § 631.11(1)(b) (2003-04).[1] The Pums sued
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=27590 - 2007-02-06
State v. David W. Oakley
COUNTY: Sheboygan JUDGE: John B. Murphy JUSTICES: Concurred
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=17389 - 2005-03-31
COUNTY: Sheboygan JUDGE: John B. Murphy JUSTICES: Concurred
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=17389 - 2005-03-31