Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 37781 - 37790 of 44722 for part.

[PDF] CA Blank Order
ineffective assistance by failing to move for dismissal. Courts employ a four-part balancing test
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=959044 - 2025-05-20

COURT OF APPEALS
a therapist’s explanation in a 1998 report that part of the reason Dahl was terminated from the SOTP
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=52368 - 2010-07-20

COURT OF APPEALS
was followed by a discussion of discrepancies in the PSI of Stephens’s prior record. It was part of a larger
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=32501 - 2008-04-22

[PDF] State v. Jamal D. Jones
on the part of the State in violating the 48-hour rule, nor has Jones pointed to any prejudice in his
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=9217 - 2017-09-19

[PDF] COURT OF APPEALS
a finding that states, in part: “The commission finds that the incidents the applicant experienced while
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=698360 - 2023-09-06

Racine County Human Services Department v. Timothy H.
the children to be in need of protection or services (CHIPS) pursuant to § 48.13(10), Stats. As part
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14299 - 2005-03-31

State v. Gilbert H. Butzlaff
body parts and to describe the sexual acts allegedly perpetrated by Butzlaff. She described Butzlaff
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10904 - 2005-03-31

[PDF] Mary J. Pietrowski v. Richard G. Dufrane
.” Id. at 544. “Such changed conditions may … result from a failure on the part of the property
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=2898 - 2017-09-19

Smith and Spidahl Enterprises, Inc. v. Mark H. Lee
. The requirements for a financing statement are set forth in § 409.402, Stats., which provides in relevant part
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10610 - 2005-03-31

[PDF] James E. Turner v. Wisconsin Department of Revenue
that this was gratuitous on the part of the circuit court, as no application of § 77.25(8m) exists in the WTAC decision
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=6564 - 2017-09-19