Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 4771 - 4780 of 20930 for word.
Search results 4771 - 4780 of 20930 for word.
State v. Jeffrey A.T.
. Admittedly, the statute repeatedly uses the word “shall.” However, nothing in the statute requires the court
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4635 - 2005-03-31
. Admittedly, the statute repeatedly uses the word “shall.” However, nothing in the statute requires the court
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4635 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
NOTICE
“paraphrased or contorted” his words. He told the PO that during the exams he did not think he was doing
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=46549 - 2014-09-15
“paraphrased or contorted” his words. He told the PO that during the exams he did not think he was doing
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=46549 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
by the words they chose” to use in a stipulation. Tufail v. Midwest Hosp., LLC, 2013 WI 62, ¶26, 348 Wis. 2d
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=842786 - 2024-08-28
by the words they chose” to use in a stipulation. Tufail v. Midwest Hosp., LLC, 2013 WI 62, ¶26, 348 Wis. 2d
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=842786 - 2024-08-28
[PDF]
WI 77
wording in the proposed rule changes. Therefore, IT IS ORDERED that: SECTION 1. Supreme Court Rule
/sc/rulhear/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=172491 - 2017-09-21
wording in the proposed rule changes. Therefore, IT IS ORDERED that: SECTION 1. Supreme Court Rule
/sc/rulhear/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=172491 - 2017-09-21
State v. Mark Sevelin
." When construing a statute, our first inquiry is whether the words of the statute have an unambiguous
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10531 - 2005-03-31
." When construing a statute, our first inquiry is whether the words of the statute have an unambiguous
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10531 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
NOTICE
review the circuit court’s decision, since it was the final word below. No. 2006AP2110 4
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=30998 - 2014-09-15
review the circuit court’s decision, since it was the final word below. No. 2006AP2110 4
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=30998 - 2014-09-15
City of Green Bay v. Donald J. Schleis
). “In the absence of a statutory definition, the common and generally understood meaning of a word should be applied
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=16135 - 2005-03-31
). “In the absence of a statutory definition, the common and generally understood meaning of a word should be applied
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=16135 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
The policy does not define “temporary substitute.” In interpreting such a phrase, we give words their common
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=34053 - 2008-09-15
The policy does not define “temporary substitute.” In interpreting such a phrase, we give words their common
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=34053 - 2008-09-15
CA Blank Order
surcharge or otherwise use “magic words.” State v. Ziller, 2011 WI App 164, ¶¶12-13, 338 Wis. 2d 151, 807
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=132053 - 2014-12-22
surcharge or otherwise use “magic words.” State v. Ziller, 2011 WI App 164, ¶¶12-13, 338 Wis. 2d 151, 807
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=132053 - 2014-12-22
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
argument appears to confuse the standards for perfect and imperfect self-defense. In other words
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=66422 - 2014-09-15
argument appears to confuse the standards for perfect and imperfect self-defense. In other words
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=66422 - 2014-09-15