Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 5801 - 5810 of 68485 for did.
Search results 5801 - 5810 of 68485 for did.
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
, but then said that he did see the fight but “did not see who it was between.” The officer testified
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=191100 - 2017-09-21
, but then said that he did see the fight but “did not see who it was between.” The officer testified
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=191100 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
Gail Zimbrick v. Labor and Industry Review Commission
holding that Gail Zimbrick did not receive adequate notice of a worker’s compensation hearing
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15764 - 2017-09-21
holding that Gail Zimbrick did not receive adequate notice of a worker’s compensation hearing
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15764 - 2017-09-21
Charlotte A. Bausano v. James J. Bausano
discretion in awarding maintenance because it did not adequately consider the relevant statutory factors
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=2441 - 2005-03-31
discretion in awarding maintenance because it did not adequately consider the relevant statutory factors
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=2441 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
policy that, even with an apparently legitimate ID, an individual who did not appear to be twenty-one
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=97787 - 2013-06-04
policy that, even with an apparently legitimate ID, an individual who did not appear to be twenty-one
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=97787 - 2013-06-04
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
because the amount of the equalization payment at issue was erroneous or ambiguous and because he did
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=133440 - 2017-09-21
because the amount of the equalization payment at issue was erroneous or ambiguous and because he did
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=133440 - 2017-09-21
State v. John Lee Doll
was harmless error, because the trial court did not erroneously exercise its discretion when it admitted
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=16326 - 2005-03-31
was harmless error, because the trial court did not erroneously exercise its discretion when it admitted
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=16326 - 2005-03-31
State v. Barbara A. DuVal
due process rights were violated because the police did not investigate her alibi, she did not receive
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15260 - 2005-03-31
due process rights were violated because the police did not investigate her alibi, she did not receive
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15260 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
State v. Christopher Anderson
argument. He also argues that this error was not harmless. We conclude that the trial court did
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=21458 - 2017-09-21
argument. He also argues that this error was not harmless. We conclude that the trial court did
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=21458 - 2017-09-21
COURT OF APPEALS
discretion by improperly ceding the decision to use the device to law enforcement, and did not make its own
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=43443 - 2009-11-11
discretion by improperly ceding the decision to use the device to law enforcement, and did not make its own
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=43443 - 2009-11-11
State v. George Mason
an additional five years under a penalty enhancer. Mason further testified that when he informed counsel he did
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=5714 - 2005-03-31
an additional five years under a penalty enhancer. Mason further testified that when he informed counsel he did
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=5714 - 2005-03-31