Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 43971 - 43980 of 58492 for speedy trial.

[PDF] COURT OF APPEALS
the ineffectiveness of his trial counsel for failing to present an expert witness. We affirmed. See State v
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=145725 - 2017-09-21

[PDF] COURT OF APPEALS
) the contracts, read together, are ambiguous and, therefore, require a trial involving disputed extrinsic
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=184491 - 2017-09-21

Leo W. Ziulkowski v. Gregory M. Nierengarten
., and the Patients Compensation Fund. Richard and Cynthia claim the trial court erred in granting Nierengarten’s
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9240 - 2005-03-31

[PDF] State v. Miya L.A.
in the case on December 15, 1995.3 As we have seen, however, the trial court held a dispositional hearing
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=11088 - 2017-09-19

[PDF] WI APP 147
it from introducing at a trial evidence of the diminution in value of its property due to a loss
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=104520 - 2017-09-21

COURT OF APPEALS
, must set forth specific facts showing that there is a genuine issue for trial. If the adverse party
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=36186 - 2011-04-15

2008 WI APP 20
, Kennedy challenged the admission at trial of the results of the BAC test conducted at the Minnesota
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=31617 - 2008-02-19

James G. Kiecker v. Wisconsin Lutheran College
to the decision of the trial court, although we benefit from its analysis. Id. The purpose of will construction
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4486 - 2005-03-31

State v. Jeff S. Mohr
),[1] by arguing that the trial court’s refusal to suppress evidence the police obtained when
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15913 - 2005-03-31

American World, Inc. v. City of Wisconsin Dells
" license to American World. The trial court determined that the action was a proceeding under § 125.12(2
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10296 - 2005-03-31