Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 46471 - 46480 of 83915 for case number.
Search results 46471 - 46480 of 83915 for case number.
[PDF]
State v. Mark O. Williams
a postconviction motion order denying him six days’ sentencing credit, arguing that his custody in this case
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=5692 - 2017-09-19
a postconviction motion order denying him six days’ sentencing credit, arguing that his custody in this case
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=5692 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
a workplace injury. Nevertheless, the Commission stated “that point had not been reached in this case
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1045151 - 2025-12-02
a workplace injury. Nevertheless, the Commission stated “that point had not been reached in this case
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1045151 - 2025-12-02
[PDF]
NOTICE
the case for a new trial: (1) the circuit No. 2006AP2977-CR 2 court erred by permitting
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=32170 - 2014-09-15
the case for a new trial: (1) the circuit No. 2006AP2977-CR 2 court erred by permitting
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=32170 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
State v. David Buck
PUBLISHED OPINION Case
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10713 - 2017-09-20
PUBLISHED OPINION Case
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10713 - 2017-09-20
Lee R. Krahenbuhl, DDS v. Wisconsin Dentistry Examining Board
2006 WI App 73 court of appeals of wisconsin published opinion Case No.: 2005AP1376
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=24556 - 2006-04-25
2006 WI App 73 court of appeals of wisconsin published opinion Case No.: 2005AP1376
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=24556 - 2006-04-25
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
“effectively, six years, in bringing this suit” without an excuse. ¶8 The primary case on which Bukovic
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=139858 - 2017-09-21
“effectively, six years, in bringing this suit” without an excuse. ¶8 The primary case on which Bukovic
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=139858 - 2017-09-21
Milwaukee County v. Ronald L. Collison
of that property is reduced from what it would be if the property were uncontaminated. In this case, it appears
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=24879 - 2006-04-24
of that property is reduced from what it would be if the property were uncontaminated. In this case, it appears
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=24879 - 2006-04-24
[PDF]
NOTICE
in this personal injury case.1 The trial court granted summary judgment to American Family, concluding
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=53088 - 2014-09-15
in this personal injury case.1 The trial court granted summary judgment to American Family, concluding
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=53088 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
State v. Kelly K. Koopmans
PUBLISHED OPINION Case
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=8317 - 2017-09-19
PUBLISHED OPINION Case
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=8317 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
State v. Thomas W. Koeppen
of conditions has no evidentiary value. Moreover, the bond in this case required Koeppen to submit to “orders
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=2760 - 2017-09-19
of conditions has no evidentiary value. Moreover, the bond in this case required Koeppen to submit to “orders
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=2760 - 2017-09-19