Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 39431 - 39440 of 58531 for speedy trial.
Search results 39431 - 39440 of 58531 for speedy trial.
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
. The operative statute there called for de novo review by the trial court. Soo Line commenced an action
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=98639 - 2014-09-15
. The operative statute there called for de novo review by the trial court. Soo Line commenced an action
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=98639 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
NOTICE
decide the case on the record made before Judge Langhoff and the parties’ trial briefs. In his
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=27980 - 2014-09-15
decide the case on the record made before Judge Langhoff and the parties’ trial briefs. In his
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=27980 - 2014-09-15
Diana M. Anderson v. Sauk Prairie Memorial Hospital
review the trial court’s decision to grant summary judgment de novo, using the same methodology
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15833 - 2005-03-31
review the trial court’s decision to grant summary judgment de novo, using the same methodology
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15833 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
in the loss of their dog. Society did not appear at trial, and the circuit court entered a default judgment
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=53541 - 2010-08-24
in the loss of their dog. Society did not appear at trial, and the circuit court entered a default judgment
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=53541 - 2010-08-24
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
, “appellants”) appeal from an order of the circuit court denying their motion for a new trial
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=76801 - 2014-09-15
, “appellants”) appeal from an order of the circuit court denying their motion for a new trial
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=76801 - 2014-09-15
Neil S. Hubbard v. Shaun Messer
Hubbard’s attorney fees.[1] The trial court ruled that the purpose of Wis. Stat. § 109.11 was to penalize
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=5406 - 2005-03-31
Hubbard’s attorney fees.[1] The trial court ruled that the purpose of Wis. Stat. § 109.11 was to penalize
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=5406 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
State v. Thomas A. Mikulance
argued that “[t]he State and trial court failed to inform [him] of the maximum penalties
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=21764 - 2017-09-21
argued that “[t]he State and trial court failed to inform [him] of the maximum penalties
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=21764 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
State v. Timothy L. Kaelin
), STATS., all as a repeater contrary to § 939.62, STATS. A preliminary hearing was held and the trial
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=8017 - 2017-09-19
), STATS., all as a repeater contrary to § 939.62, STATS. A preliminary hearing was held and the trial
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=8017 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
him, after a jury trial, of disorderly conduct and unlawful use of a computerized
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=115994 - 2017-09-21
him, after a jury trial, of disorderly conduct and unlawful use of a computerized
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=115994 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
Carole L. Arenz v. Leo J. Bronston
providers” under § 893.55. The trial court concluded that chiropractors are No. 98-1357 4
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=14008 - 2014-09-15
providers” under § 893.55. The trial court concluded that chiropractors are No. 98-1357 4
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=14008 - 2014-09-15