Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 39841 - 39850 of 68485 for did.
Search results 39841 - 39850 of 68485 for did.
William Charles Sharp v. Thomas M. Hughes
. The Sharps also argue the court erred when it determined that, even if the Hugheses did not have record title
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=18163 - 2005-05-16
. The Sharps also argue the court erred when it determined that, even if the Hugheses did not have record title
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=18163 - 2005-05-16
COURT OF APPEALS
was justified in shooting Burgess and Young because the evidence did not support the defense-of-others privilege
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=123551 - 2014-10-13
was justified in shooting Burgess and Young because the evidence did not support the defense-of-others privilege
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=123551 - 2014-10-13
COURT OF APPEALS
or other drug, first offense, contrary to Wis. Stat. § 346.63(1)(a).[2] She argues that: (1) she did
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=62279 - 2011-04-04
or other drug, first offense, contrary to Wis. Stat. § 346.63(1)(a).[2] She argues that: (1) she did
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=62279 - 2011-04-04
COURT OF APPEALS
about, or was in a position to observe and discover,” the abuse, but she “did nothing to stop, prevent
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=107438 - 2014-01-27
about, or was in a position to observe and discover,” the abuse, but she “did nothing to stop, prevent
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=107438 - 2014-01-27
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
concedes that his federal and state prosecutions were proper and did not violate his double jeopardy
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=69580 - 2014-09-15
concedes that his federal and state prosecutions were proper and did not violate his double jeopardy
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=69580 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
. The subsequent review date did not effectively resentence him to an additional thirty-six months
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=137604 - 2017-09-21
. The subsequent review date did not effectively resentence him to an additional thirty-six months
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=137604 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
and the circuit court did not erroneously exercise its discretion when it denied Reel’s motion.2 ¶10
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=961024 - 2025-05-28
and the circuit court did not erroneously exercise its discretion when it denied Reel’s motion.2 ¶10
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=961024 - 2025-05-28
[PDF]
State v. Stuart D. Yates
as a condition of that probation. During the plea colloquy, the court did not inform Yates that he would
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15674 - 2017-09-21
as a condition of that probation. During the plea colloquy, the court did not inform Yates that he would
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15674 - 2017-09-21
Sandra L. Halgerson v. Labor and Industry Review Commission
of the weekly claim procedure, claimants are required to answer the question, “Did you work?” If a claimant has
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=2630 - 2005-03-31
of the weekly claim procedure, claimants are required to answer the question, “Did you work?” If a claimant has
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=2630 - 2005-03-31
Bank One v. Gregg A. Koch
. Hall testified that he did not remember the loan transaction at issue, and that it was not his practice
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4294 - 2005-03-31
. Hall testified that he did not remember the loan transaction at issue, and that it was not his practice
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4294 - 2005-03-31