Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 3761 - 3770 of 5316 for text.

[PDF] FILED
of additional rules. When the text of a rule uses "shall," "shall not" or "may not," it is intended to impose
/sc/rulhear/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=87583 - 2014-09-15

Kenosha Hospital & Medical Center v. Jesus E. Garcia
it. To decide this issue, we look to the text of 11 U.S.C. § 362(a) and the case law interpreting this provision
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=16643 - 2005-03-31

Grant County Department of Social Services v. Unified Board of Grant and Iowa Counties
a statute is ambiguous, we often consult extrinsic "interpretive resources outside the statutory text
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=18922 - 2005-07-06

[PDF] John Gillen v. City of Neenah
no basis in statutory language or legislative history. ¶50 The text of Wis. Stat. § 30.294 expressly
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=17147 - 2017-09-21

[PDF] COURT OF APPEALS
, ¶32. 4 Although, as we have noted in the text
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=77188 - 2014-09-15

COURT OF APPEALS
COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND FILED January 26, 2012 A. John Voelker Acting Clerk of Court...
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=77188 - 2012-02-07

NOTICE This opinion is subject to further editing and modification. The final version will appea...
. The Commentary 1s not intended as a statement of additional rules. When the text of a rule uses "shall," "shall
/sc/scord/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=87583 - 2012-09-25

[PDF] Mary E. Panzer v. James E. Doyle
on the net proceeds of the state lottery. Wis. Const. art. IV, § 6(a). This text predates the 1993
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=16775 - 2017-09-21

Mary E. Panzer v. James E. Doyle
(a). This text predates the 1993 amendment, except for an insignificant modification in 1999. ¶31 The 1993
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=16775 - 2005-03-31

Joan A. German v. Wisconsin Department of Transportation
by the most express language or by such overwhelming implication from the text as to leave no room for any
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=17356 - 2005-03-31