Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 41561 - 41570 of 57333 for id.

State v. Lonnie C. Davis
, and the need to protect the public. Id. at 62. The weight to be given to each of the factors, however
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=7484 - 2005-05-24

[PDF] Timothy Brown and Katharine Brown v. Dane County
more litigation, with its attendant costs and demands. No. 01-0321 9 Id. 8 ¶15 Finally
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=3577 - 2017-09-19

[PDF] COURT OF APPEALS
.” Id. at 217-18. We are satisfied that Leiser’s interests in case No. 1998CF1659 are not adversely
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=98604 - 2014-09-15

[PDF] NOTICE
, the claimed error was sufficiently prejudicial to warrant a new trial. Id. When the court denies a motion
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=27406 - 2014-09-15

[PDF] Cheryl Jean Swetlik v. William Philip Swetlik
would have enjoyed had the marriage continued. Id. at ¶36. Thus, it accommodates the parents
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=3608 - 2017-09-19

COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND FILED March 20, 2007 A. John Voelker Acting Clerk of Court o...
(Ct. App. 1983). The trial court is the ultimate arbiter of the credibility of the witnesses. Id
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=28483 - 2007-03-19

COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND FILED February 7, 2012 A. John Voelker Acting Clerk of Court...
.’” Id. (citation omitted; brackets in LeMere). We will sustain a discretionary decision if the trial
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=77644 - 2012-02-06

[PDF] State v. Roy J. Jones
right was designed to protect. Id. at 532. These interests include: (1) preventing oppressive
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13720 - 2014-09-15

[PDF] COURT OF APPEALS
plea was not made knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily.” Id. ¶14 In determining whether plea
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=115241 - 2017-09-21

[PDF] State v. David Watts
not substantially outweighed by its prejudicial effect. Id. at 645-46, 456 N.W.2d at 330 (citations omitted
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=12962 - 2017-09-21