Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 36591 - 36600 of 83001 for case codes/1000.
Search results 36591 - 36600 of 83001 for case codes/1000.
COURT OF APPEALS
. However, the earlier version of § 973.01 addressed in both cases applied only to felonies.[3] Both cases
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=42994 - 2009-11-02
. However, the earlier version of § 973.01 addressed in both cases applied only to felonies.[3] Both cases
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=42994 - 2009-11-02
[PDF]
Board of Attorneys Professional Responsibility v. Theodore F. Mazza
2002 WI 36 SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN CASE NO.: 76-0476-D & 83-0843-D
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=16840 - 2017-09-21
2002 WI 36 SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN CASE NO.: 76-0476-D & 83-0843-D
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=16840 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
Rebecca J. Atwood v. Robert E. Atwood
, used for pre-retirement personal objectives. Robert argues that the court erred because cases
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=12927 - 2017-09-21
, used for pre-retirement personal objectives. Robert argues that the court erred because cases
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=12927 - 2017-09-21
Rupert J. Loeffler v. Emma G. Loeffler
. The general rule is that although counsel has justifiable cause for withdrawing from the case, he or she
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9281 - 2005-03-31
. The general rule is that although counsel has justifiable cause for withdrawing from the case, he or she
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9281 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
, obsolete, or inapt case law.” ¶11 We agree with the insurers that this issue is resolved based on two
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=170438 - 2017-09-21
, obsolete, or inapt case law.” ¶11 We agree with the insurers that this issue is resolved based on two
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=170438 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
State v. Daniel Anderson
COURT OF APPEALS OF WISCONSIN PUBLISHED OPINION Case Nos.: 96-0087-CR 96-0088
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10225 - 2017-09-20
COURT OF APPEALS OF WISCONSIN PUBLISHED OPINION Case Nos.: 96-0087-CR 96-0088
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10225 - 2017-09-20
[PDF]
State v. Daniel Slaughter
. Slaughter raises three issues. First, as in his previous appeal in this case, he claims the trial court
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13622 - 2017-09-21
. Slaughter raises three issues. First, as in his previous appeal in this case, he claims the trial court
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13622 - 2017-09-21
COURT OF APPEALS
deficiency. The court reasoned that, given the facts of the case, there was reasonable suspicion to extend
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=103040 - 2013-10-14
deficiency. The court reasoned that, given the facts of the case, there was reasonable suspicion to extend
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=103040 - 2013-10-14
State v. Leroy W. Senn
) the trial court erred by denying Senn’s motion to dismiss at the conclusion of the State’s case; and (2
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=3472 - 2005-03-31
) the trial court erred by denying Senn’s motion to dismiss at the conclusion of the State’s case; and (2
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=3472 - 2005-03-31
State v. Michael W. Farrell
COURT OF APPEALS OF WISCONSIN PUBLISHED OPINION Case No.: 98-1179-CR
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13933 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS OF WISCONSIN PUBLISHED OPINION Case No.: 98-1179-CR
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13933 - 2005-03-31