Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 37441 - 37450 of 50524 for our.
Search results 37441 - 37450 of 50524 for our.
State v. James T. Fitzgerald
, “We considered our statutes to define prisoner as a person ‘who has been confined as a means
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14965 - 2005-03-31
, “We considered our statutes to define prisoner as a person ‘who has been confined as a means
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14965 - 2005-03-31
State v. Jesse Rasmussen
harsh and unconscionable. ¶11 Our conclusion that the court did not erroneously exercise its
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=5683 - 2005-03-31
harsh and unconscionable. ¶11 Our conclusion that the court did not erroneously exercise its
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=5683 - 2005-03-31
Schams Joint Revocable Trust by David F. Schams v. William M. Evans
we may, in the proper exercise of our discretion, choose not to employ in a given case. Department
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14841 - 2005-03-31
we may, in the proper exercise of our discretion, choose not to employ in a given case. Department
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14841 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
to undermine our confidence in the outcome. See id. ¶11 As noted above, the County needed to prove
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=31137 - 2007-12-10
to undermine our confidence in the outcome. See id. ¶11 As noted above, the County needed to prove
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=31137 - 2007-12-10
Fabricating Engineers v. George Anderson
not substitute the weight and credibility determinations of the commission with our own. See Valadzic v. Briggs
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=20350 - 2005-11-21
not substitute the weight and credibility determinations of the commission with our own. See Valadzic v. Briggs
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=20350 - 2005-11-21
COURT OF APPEALS
a conviction in circumstantial evidence cases, we may not substitute our judgment for that of the trier of fact
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=44277 - 2009-12-09
a conviction in circumstantial evidence cases, we may not substitute our judgment for that of the trier of fact
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=44277 - 2009-12-09
COURT OF APPEALS
and we do not address arguments made for the first time on appeal. Our job is to review judicial
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=34980 - 2008-12-22
and we do not address arguments made for the first time on appeal. Our job is to review judicial
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=34980 - 2008-12-22
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
great deference to the trier-of-fact and do not substitute our judgment unless the evidence, viewed
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=195745 - 2017-09-21
great deference to the trier-of-fact and do not substitute our judgment unless the evidence, viewed
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=195745 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
State v. Clayton T. Veldt
is that it has already been rejected by our supreme court. The fact of a prior conviction is not an element
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=5357 - 2017-09-19
is that it has already been rejected by our supreme court. The fact of a prior conviction is not an element
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=5357 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
Sybil Drabek v. Floyd Rasmussen
this decision, our interpretation of the statute is a question of law that we review de novo. See Hunzinger
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=12402 - 2017-09-21
this decision, our interpretation of the statute is a question of law that we review de novo. See Hunzinger
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=12402 - 2017-09-21