Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 34561 - 34570 of 57231 for id.

State v. Joseph Pearce
as the severity of the offense charged and the nature of the verdict returned.[1] Id. 327, 504 N.W.2d at 364
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9523 - 2005-03-31

Robert K. Rowe v. Attorneys' Liability Assurance Society, Inc.
find both procedural and substantive unconscionability. See id. at 89-90, 483 N.W.2d at 587-88
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13117 - 2005-03-31

State v. Daniel J. Beck
, however, concurrent jurisdiction allows a conviction in either state for violation of such laws. Id
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10566 - 2005-03-31

[PDF] NOTICE
was not substantially justified. See id. The court concluded the Department was substantially justified in taking
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=33493 - 2014-09-15

[PDF] State v. Isom Brumfield, Jr.
of the motion only if the trial court erroneously exercised its discretion. See id. As noted above, our
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13293 - 2017-09-21

State v. Annette S.
will be affirmed. See id., ¶ 39 (citation omitted). Accordingly, “appellate courts search the record for credible
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6495 - 2005-03-31

Dane County Department of Human Services v. P. P.
may not be dismissed because of lack of unfitness or degrees of unfitness. Id., ¶¶36-38. Rather
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6875 - 2005-03-31

COURT OF APPEALS
and the party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Id.; Wis. Stat. § 802.08(2). ¶10 This case
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=54241 - 2010-09-08

State v. Donald J. Buford
will be upheld unless clearly erroneous and determinations of law will be reviewed independently. Id. at 189-90
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6924 - 2005-03-31

[PDF] Kathleen Selaiden v. Columbia Hospital
determination, see id., 166 Wis. 2d at 634, 480 N.W.2d at 499; Holley v. Department of Indus., Labor & Human
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=4245 - 2017-09-19