Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 48551 - 48560 of 82997 for case codes/1000.
Search results 48551 - 48560 of 82997 for case codes/1000.
COURT OF APPEALS
. ¶1 FINE, J. This case has its genesis in an action Stephanie M. Przytarski, p/k/a Stephanie
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=65110 - 2011-05-31
. ¶1 FINE, J. This case has its genesis in an action Stephanie M. Przytarski, p/k/a Stephanie
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=65110 - 2011-05-31
COURT OF APPEALS
sentence and issued an oral ruling, but the two written orders in this case were signed by Judge Timothy M
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=34511 - 2008-11-05
sentence and issued an oral ruling, but the two written orders in this case were signed by Judge Timothy M
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=34511 - 2008-11-05
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
reviewing the record, we have determined this case is appropriate for summary disposition. See WIS. STAT
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=213697 - 2018-06-05
reviewing the record, we have determined this case is appropriate for summary disposition. See WIS. STAT
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=213697 - 2018-06-05
CA Blank Order
for postconviction relief. After reviewing the briefs and record, we conclude at conference that this case
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=109971 - 2014-04-02
for postconviction relief. After reviewing the briefs and record, we conclude at conference that this case
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=109971 - 2014-04-02
CA Blank Order
conclude at conference that this case is appropriate for summary disposition. See Wis. Stat. Rule 809.21
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=144518 - 2015-07-13
conclude at conference that this case is appropriate for summary disposition. See Wis. Stat. Rule 809.21
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=144518 - 2015-07-13
[PDF]
State v. David Scott Mathis
court found: In this particular case, first of all, the Court notes, one, it may not even have
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=3074 - 2017-09-19
court found: In this particular case, first of all, the Court notes, one, it may not even have
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=3074 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
State v. Thomas G. Larson
this as a case where the State has destroyed or failed to preserve evidence it already had. Even under
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=5754 - 2017-09-19
this as a case where the State has destroyed or failed to preserve evidence it already had. Even under
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=5754 - 2017-09-19
Ellen M. Gleason v. Richard J. Gleason
Richard raised in the first appeal from this case. By summary order, we conclusively determined
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=5162 - 2005-03-31
Richard raised in the first appeal from this case. By summary order, we conclusively determined
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=5162 - 2005-03-31
State v. Trentt O. Kinison
that “[u]nder Wisconsin case law, breathalyzer tests carry a ‘prima facie presumption of accuracy
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=7453 - 2005-03-31
that “[u]nder Wisconsin case law, breathalyzer tests carry a ‘prima facie presumption of accuracy
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=7453 - 2005-03-31
Milwaukee County v. Robert E. Berry
(1990) (citations omitted). Case law has defined “held out for public use” as “whether, on any given
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14922 - 2005-03-31
(1990) (citations omitted). Case law has defined “held out for public use” as “whether, on any given
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14922 - 2005-03-31