Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 4671 - 4680 of 43138 for t o.
Search results 4671 - 4680 of 43138 for t o.
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
. “[O]ne ‘unreasonable and unjustifiable basis’ for a sentence is a trial judge’s employment
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=390771 - 2021-07-14
. “[O]ne ‘unreasonable and unjustifiable basis’ for a sentence is a trial judge’s employment
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=390771 - 2021-07-14
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
, “[O]n November 1, 2009 the elasticity clause … had the effect of incorporating the changes [imposed
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=108361 - 2017-09-21
, “[O]n November 1, 2009 the elasticity clause … had the effect of incorporating the changes [imposed
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=108361 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
James Schuette v. Ronald L. Van De Hey
was submitted on the brief of John J. Prentice and Andrew T. Phillips of Prentice, Pierski & Phillips
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10387 - 2017-09-20
was submitted on the brief of John J. Prentice and Andrew T. Phillips of Prentice, Pierski & Phillips
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10387 - 2017-09-20
Scott R. Nasgovitz v. American Family Mutual Insurance Company
in Roehl included an elasticity clause which read that the “[t]erms of this policy which are in conflict
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15216 - 2005-03-31
in Roehl included an elasticity clause which read that the “[t]erms of this policy which are in conflict
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15216 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
provides that “[n]o person who has substantial involvement in an incident, which is the subject
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=62851 - 2011-04-13
provides that “[n]o person who has substantial involvement in an incident, which is the subject
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=62851 - 2011-04-13
COURT OF APPEALS
, expressly confirmed the prior ruling, providing: “[t]he court affirms its decision of November 20, 2008
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=68895 - 2011-08-01
, expressly confirmed the prior ruling, providing: “[t]he court affirms its decision of November 20, 2008
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=68895 - 2011-08-01
COURT OF APPEALS
). Conditional uses in the B-3 waterfront business district include “[t]averns and bars,” “[y]achting clubs
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=132800 - 2015-01-13
). Conditional uses in the B-3 waterfront business district include “[t]averns and bars,” “[y]achting clubs
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=132800 - 2015-01-13
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
, and requested that the court consider it “[t]o the extent that the court wishe[d] to have this [matter
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=691500 - 2023-08-16
, and requested that the court consider it “[t]o the extent that the court wishe[d] to have this [matter
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=691500 - 2023-08-16
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
to disrupt her criminal behavior, and that it intended its sentence “[t]o create a significant disruption
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=203103 - 2017-11-17
to disrupt her criminal behavior, and that it intended its sentence “[t]o create a significant disruption
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=203103 - 2017-11-17
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
approaching an individual on the street in a public place asking him if he’s willing to talk…. [T]he
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=134240 - 2017-09-21
approaching an individual on the street in a public place asking him if he’s willing to talk…. [T]he
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=134240 - 2017-09-21