Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 34361 - 34370 of 57221 for id.

[PDF] Jeffrey D. Knickmeier v. James E. Reinke
), for the proposition that “‘[s]pecific findings as to facts established … at the trial are required.’” Id. at 687
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=26006 - 2017-09-21

[PDF] WI 121
the referee's conclusions of law, however, on a de novo basis. Id. Finally, No. 2009AP1529-D 16
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=55548 - 2014-09-15

[PDF] State v. Danny A. Reynolds
after revocation, id. at ¶9 n.3, but need not “restate the reasons supporting the original sentencing
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=3641 - 2017-09-19

[PDF] Kurt Hallin v. John Hallin
to him.” Id. at 342, 124 N.W.2d at 302. In addition, the trustee has the burden of “showing
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13224 - 2017-09-21

[PDF] Northland Whitehall Apartments Limited Partnership v. City of Whitehall Board of Review
with the statutory mandate’” and “‘if it can be supported by any reasonable view of the evidence.’” Id. Moreover
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=21521 - 2017-09-21

Frontsheet
. 2d 662, 636 N.W.2d 718. We independently review the referee's legal conclusions. Id. ¶19 We
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=48993 - 2010-04-13

Providence Catholic School v. Bristol School District No. 1
its discretion in deciding whether to retain jurisdiction. See id. at 420, 491 N.W.2d at 491. We
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14820 - 2005-03-31

Kimberly Schreiber v. Physicians Insurance Company of Wisconsin
treatments. Id. at 174-75, 531 N.W.2d at 78 (the doctor must provide information “reasonably necessary
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=11886 - 2005-03-31

[PDF] State v. Willie Hogan
of the strict-scrutiny test is appropriate, given the liberty interests involved. Id., 2001 WI App 202 at ¶5
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=3283 - 2017-09-19

[PDF] COURT OF APPEALS
is not knowing, intelligent, and voluntary, and may be withdrawn. See id., ¶¶67-68 (defendant entitled
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=87554 - 2014-09-15