Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 46821 - 46830 of 82649 for case codes/1000.
Search results 46821 - 46830 of 82649 for case codes/1000.
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
. § 946.41(1) 1 This case is decided by one judge
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=66183 - 2014-09-15
. § 946.41(1) 1 This case is decided by one judge
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=66183 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
State v. Patricia A. Weed
. 1 The importance of this statement for the State’s case is that Patricia’s having to stop
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=4032 - 2017-09-20
. 1 The importance of this statement for the State’s case is that Patricia’s having to stop
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=4032 - 2017-09-20
[PDF]
Patricia H. Roth v. LaFarge School District Board of Canvassers
2002 WI App 309 COURT OF APPEALS OF WISCONSIN PUBLISHED OPINION Case No.: 02-0542
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=4989 - 2017-09-19
2002 WI App 309 COURT OF APPEALS OF WISCONSIN PUBLISHED OPINION Case No.: 02-0542
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=4989 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
State v. Patrick D. O'Donnell
in the chain of inferences that are of consequence to the particular case. See State v. Sullivan, 216 Wis.2d
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=14878 - 2017-09-21
in the chain of inferences that are of consequence to the particular case. See State v. Sullivan, 216 Wis.2d
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=14878 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
a discretionary determination when the court applies the correct legal standard to the facts of the case
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=100977 - 2017-09-21
a discretionary determination when the court applies the correct legal standard to the facts of the case
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=100977 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
conclude at conference that this case is appropriate for summary disposition. See WIS. STAT. RULE 809.21
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=239839 - 2019-05-01
conclude at conference that this case is appropriate for summary disposition. See WIS. STAT. RULE 809.21
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=239839 - 2019-05-01
Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Albert J. Armonda
2004 WI 82 Supreme Court of Wisconsin Case No.: 04-0984-D Complete Title
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=16828 - 2005-03-31
2004 WI 82 Supreme Court of Wisconsin Case No.: 04-0984-D Complete Title
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=16828 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
FICE OF THE CLERK
that this case is appropriate for summary disposition. See WIS. STAT. RULE 809.21 (2023-24).1 We affirm
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=980070 - 2025-07-09
that this case is appropriate for summary disposition. See WIS. STAT. RULE 809.21 (2023-24).1 We affirm
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=980070 - 2025-07-09
COURT OF APPEALS
there was a significant change in circumstances. Id. ¶8 We conclude the stipulated facts in the present case
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=58078 - 2010-12-20
there was a significant change in circumstances. Id. ¶8 We conclude the stipulated facts in the present case
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=58078 - 2010-12-20
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
that this case is appropriate for summary 1 This appeal
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=186089 - 2017-09-21
that this case is appropriate for summary 1 This appeal
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=186089 - 2017-09-21