Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 35161 - 35170 of 58267 for speedy trial.

[PDF] Town of Liberty Grove v. Charles Voight
. Voight Marine contends the trial court erred by concluding that the Yankee Clipper is not exempt from
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13982 - 2014-09-15

Courtyard Condominium Association, Inc. v. Barbara Draper
against Draper based on her failure to pay dues and assessments on the six units. After a trial
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=2277 - 2005-03-31

COURT OF APPEALS
a trial date of October 5, 2009, in the Milwaukee Municipal Court.[4] At that time, the City called
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=53101 - 2010-08-09

[PDF] WI APP 67
responsive to the Newspaper’s request ever existed. 2 The trial court dismissed the mandamus action
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=113059 - 2017-09-21

[PDF] State v. April O.
. At the initial hearing, both April and Steven denied the petition and requested a jury trial. ¶3 The jury
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=16018 - 2017-09-21

[PDF] State v. Sally S. Boerner
. Boerner appeals from an order in which the trial court found that she refused to submit to a chemical
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13575 - 2017-09-21

Stephen D. Artus v. Town of Three Lakes
that the trial court erroneously decided disputed issues of material fact with respect to Harris’s and the Town’s
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=2996 - 2005-03-31

[PDF] WI APP 183
an order of the trial court for Dane County: C. WILLIAM FOUST, Judge. Affirmed. Before
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=34520 - 2014-09-15

[PDF] NOTICE
that entitle the opposing party to a trial. Id., ¶24. We view the materials in the light most favorable
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=48500 - 2014-09-15

Douglas Ingram v. David H. Schwarz
and Mawdsley,[1] JJ. PER CURIAM. Douglas Ingram has appealed pro se from a trial court order quashing
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13669 - 2005-03-31