Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 51031 - 51040 of 82626 for simple case.
Search results 51031 - 51040 of 82626 for simple case.
[PDF]
NOTICE
the facts of this case, the County was not subject to statutory restrictions applicable to municipal
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=34045 - 2014-09-15
the facts of this case, the County was not subject to statutory restrictions applicable to municipal
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=34045 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
” received a copy of the criminal complaint in that case. He testified further that he was “sure
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=831490 - 2024-07-31
” received a copy of the criminal complaint in that case. He testified further that he was “sure
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=831490 - 2024-07-31
[PDF]
State v. Brent A. Graziano
when it prevented him from calling a social services case worker as a witness. Graziano’s failure
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=19416 - 2017-09-21
when it prevented him from calling a social services case worker as a witness. Graziano’s failure
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=19416 - 2017-09-21
State v. Christopher D. Smith
in one case does not transform a reasonable punishment in another case to a cruel one.” Ocanas, 70 Wis
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=21187 - 2006-02-06
in one case does not transform a reasonable punishment in another case to a cruel one.” Ocanas, 70 Wis
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=21187 - 2006-02-06
COURT OF APPEALS
157 (1994), because they could have been raised previously. Edwards responds that a different case
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=75605 - 2011-12-27
157 (1994), because they could have been raised previously. Edwards responds that a different case
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=75605 - 2011-12-27
[PDF]
State v. Bruce A. Rumage
is a question of law which we review de novo. See id. Rumage would have been prejudiced only if this case
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=12093 - 2017-09-21
is a question of law which we review de novo. See id. Rumage would have been prejudiced only if this case
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=12093 - 2017-09-21
State v. David G. Huusko
himself with the case. Huusko’s motion does not show an inordinate delay, an unacceptable reason
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=26441 - 2006-09-11
himself with the case. Huusko’s motion does not show an inordinate delay, an unacceptable reason
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=26441 - 2006-09-11
CA Blank Order
that this case is appropriate for summary disposition. See Wis. Stat. Rule 809.21 (2013-14).[1] We summarily
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=137519 - 2015-03-11
that this case is appropriate for summary disposition. See Wis. Stat. Rule 809.21 (2013-14).[1] We summarily
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=137519 - 2015-03-11
COURT OF APPEALS
to withdraw the NGI plea. ¶4 The case was tried to a jury. During the trial, Colyer created
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=101247 - 2013-08-26
to withdraw the NGI plea. ¶4 The case was tried to a jury. During the trial, Colyer created
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=101247 - 2013-08-26
Brown County v. April O.
pursuant to Wis. Stat. § 48.315(2), under the undisputed facts of this case, presents a legal question
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=3419 - 2005-03-31
pursuant to Wis. Stat. § 48.315(2), under the undisputed facts of this case, presents a legal question
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=3419 - 2005-03-31