Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 381 - 390 of 6293 for 208.

[PDF] WI APP 137
. Id. at 208. The court further required that any written withdrawal state that it was made
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=33686 - 2014-09-15

[PDF] State v. David J. Lenz
of the legislature. See State v. Rosenburg, 208 Wis.2d 191, 194, 560 N.W.2d 266, 267 (1997). To determine
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15331 - 2017-09-21

[PDF] State v. Giles L. Smith
the intent of the legislature. See State v. Rosenburg, 208 Wis.2d 191, 194, 560 N.W.2d 266, 267 (1997
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15160 - 2017-09-21

State v. David J. Lenz
in statutory construction is to discern the intent of the legislature. See State v. Rosenburg, 208 Wis.2d 191
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15332 - 2005-03-31

[PDF] State v. Jacqee R. Anderson
, however, was explicitly rejected in State ex rel. Jacobus v. State, 208 Wis. 2d 39, 559 N.W.2d 900 (1997
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15871 - 2017-09-21

COURT OF APPEALS
it is imposing the DNA surcharge simply because it can.” Cherry, 2008 WI App 80, ¶10, 312 Wis. 2d at 208, 752
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=123253 - 2014-10-06

[PDF] Deborah A. (Mumaw) Carpenter v. Thomas L. Mumaw
a substantial change in circumstances since the judgment of divorce. See Zutz v. Zutz, 208 Wis.2d 338, 343
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=14891 - 2017-09-21

[PDF] State v. Daren E. Maron
. Thompson, 208 Wis.2d 253, 559 N.W.2d 917 (Ct. App. 1997), we considered whether § 973.15(2) authorizes
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=12232 - 2017-09-21

Deborah A. (Mumaw) Carpenter v. Thomas L. Mumaw
Zutz v. Zutz, 208 Wis.2d 338, 343, 559 N.W.2d 919, 921 (Ct. App. 1997); § 767.32(1)(a), Stats
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14891 - 2005-03-31

Cathy Wallace v. Adult Family Care Homes
and conclusions of law, not those of the circuit court. UPS v. Lust, 208 Wis.2d 306, 321, 560 N.W.2d 301, 306 (Ct
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13062 - 2005-03-31