Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 42871 - 42880 of 82706 for case codes/1000.
Search results 42871 - 42880 of 82706 for case codes/1000.
COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND FILED January 23, 2007 A. John Voelker Acting Clerk of Court...
, ¶35 (“A trial court’s general authority to maintain the orderly and prompt processing of cases
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=27853 - 2007-01-22
, ¶35 (“A trial court’s general authority to maintain the orderly and prompt processing of cases
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=27853 - 2007-01-22
William Trussoni v. Fred J. Pedretti
case is often, however, subject to being distinguishable.” The court therefore concluded that Lunde
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=7025 - 2005-03-31
case is often, however, subject to being distinguishable.” The court therefore concluded that Lunde
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=7025 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
review of the briefs and record, we conclude at conference that this case is appropriate for summary
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=846810 - 2024-09-06
review of the briefs and record, we conclude at conference that this case is appropriate for summary
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=846810 - 2024-09-06
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
. In response to questioning, defense counsel stated that he had been assigned Logan’s case about sixty days
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=259149 - 2020-04-30
. In response to questioning, defense counsel stated that he had been assigned Logan’s case about sixty days
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=259149 - 2020-04-30
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
in both cases. The plea agreement provided for the dismissal and read in of charges in two other cases
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=218613 - 2018-09-05
in both cases. The plea agreement provided for the dismissal and read in of charges in two other cases
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=218613 - 2018-09-05
[PDF]
The Estate of Richmond P. Izard v. Richmond P. Izard
and Curley, JJ. ¶1 PER CURIAM. On August 19, 2003, by order of this court, we remanded this case
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=5906 - 2017-09-19
and Curley, JJ. ¶1 PER CURIAM. On August 19, 2003, by order of this court, we remanded this case
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=5906 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
Hugh R. Mommsen v. Duane Schueller
of their claims. We reject their arguments and affirm the order. BACKGROUND ¶2 The underlying case involved
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=4257 - 2017-09-19
of their claims. We reject their arguments and affirm the order. BACKGROUND ¶2 The underlying case involved
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=4257 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
at conference that this case is appropriate for summary disposition. See WIS. STAT. RULE 809.21 (2021-22).1
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=769887 - 2024-02-28
at conference that this case is appropriate for summary disposition. See WIS. STAT. RULE 809.21 (2021-22).1
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=769887 - 2024-02-28
State v. Lee Norman Brown
N.W.2d 711, 714 (1985). Findings of fact concerning the circumstances of the case and the counsel’s
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14656 - 2005-03-31
N.W.2d 711, 714 (1985). Findings of fact concerning the circumstances of the case and the counsel’s
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14656 - 2005-03-31
CA Blank Order
that this case is appropriate for summary disposition. See Wis. Stat. Rule 809.21 (2011-12).[1] We affirm
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=93566 - 2013-03-05
that this case is appropriate for summary disposition. See Wis. Stat. Rule 809.21 (2011-12).[1] We affirm
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=93566 - 2013-03-05