Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 3811 - 3820 of 63734 for Motion for joint custody.
Search results 3811 - 3820 of 63734 for Motion for joint custody.
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
and prove a release from custody under Chapter 969 following an arrest. Accordingly, I affirm. ¶2
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=234880 - 2019-02-14
and prove a release from custody under Chapter 969 following an arrest. Accordingly, I affirm. ¶2
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=234880 - 2019-02-14
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
also challenges the court’s custody and placement, property division, and maintenance decisions. We
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=112899 - 2017-09-21
also challenges the court’s custody and placement, property division, and maintenance decisions. We
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=112899 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
postdispositional motion to withdraw his no contest plea. In that motion, and in this appeal, T.G. Sr. argues
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=210906 - 2018-04-10
postdispositional motion to withdraw his no contest plea. In that motion, and in this appeal, T.G. Sr. argues
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=210906 - 2018-04-10
[PDF]
Susan M. Oimoen (O'Kane) v. Steven C. Oimoen
but presently is a legal resident of Texas. The Nebraska divorce decree gave legal custody and primary
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13023 - 2017-09-21
but presently is a legal resident of Texas. The Nebraska divorce decree gave legal custody and primary
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13023 - 2017-09-21
Susan M. Oimoen (O'Kane) v. Steven C. Oimoen
of Texas. The Nebraska divorce decree gave legal custody and primary placement of the children to O’Kane
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13023 - 2005-11-05
of Texas. The Nebraska divorce decree gave legal custody and primary placement of the children to O’Kane
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13023 - 2005-11-05
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
in denying a motion to suppress statements he made to law enforcement because the statements were obtained
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=868248 - 2024-10-30
in denying a motion to suppress statements he made to law enforcement because the statements were obtained
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=868248 - 2024-10-30
COURT OF APPEALS
court denied Brooks’ motions after verdict to change the jury’s answer on informed consent and denied
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=62023 - 2011-03-30
court denied Brooks’ motions after verdict to change the jury’s answer on informed consent and denied
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=62023 - 2011-03-30
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
also appeals the postconviction court’s denial of his postconviction motion. ¶2 Carter contends
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=192656 - 2017-10-13
also appeals the postconviction court’s denial of his postconviction motion. ¶2 Carter contends
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=192656 - 2017-10-13
[PDF]
NOTICE
. The circuit court denied Brooks’ motions after verdict to change the jury’s answer on informed consent
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=62023 - 2014-09-15
. The circuit court denied Brooks’ motions after verdict to change the jury’s answer on informed consent
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=62023 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
with an arrest warrant requesting extradition because Sandifer was in custody in an adjacent state. On March
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=375113 - 2021-06-09
with an arrest warrant requesting extradition because Sandifer was in custody in an adjacent state. On March
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=375113 - 2021-06-09