Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 6631 - 6640 of 20930 for word.
Search results 6631 - 6640 of 20930 for word.
Yehuda Elmakias v. Michael Wayda
and his counsel, no amount of court attention is enough; no number of words or pieces of paper is too many
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14769 - 2005-03-31
and his counsel, no amount of court attention is enough; no number of words or pieces of paper is too many
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14769 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
MCI Telecommunications Corporation v. The State of Wisconsin
, "[a]n interpretation is unreasonable if it directly contravenes the words of the statute
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=17003 - 2017-09-21
, "[a]n interpretation is unreasonable if it directly contravenes the words of the statute
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=17003 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
Tara Kestel-Rauls v. Dale T. Moore
words or terms are to be construed by extrinsic evidence, the question is one for the trier of fact
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13377 - 2017-09-21
words or terms are to be construed by extrinsic evidence, the question is one for the trier of fact
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13377 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
Robert A. Novotny v. National Western Life Insurance Company
that a word has more than one dictionary meaning, or that the parties disagree about the meaning, does
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10647 - 2017-09-20
that a word has more than one dictionary meaning, or that the parties disagree about the meaning, does
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10647 - 2017-09-20
State v. Kelly S.
construed the legislature’s use of the word “warrant” as evidence of a grant of authority to the trial court
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=3580 - 2005-03-31
construed the legislature’s use of the word “warrant” as evidence of a grant of authority to the trial court
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=3580 - 2005-03-31
2011 WI APP 23
). The word “may” in a statute generally allows for the exercise of discretion, as opposed to the word “shall
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=58834 - 2011-02-15
). The word “may” in a statute generally allows for the exercise of discretion, as opposed to the word “shall
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=58834 - 2011-02-15
COURT OF APPEALS
based upon an imputed earning capacity. In other words, the merits of the child support motion had
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=33495 - 2008-07-23
based upon an imputed earning capacity. In other words, the merits of the child support motion had
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=33495 - 2008-07-23
State v. Kevin Ryan
to speak with him. Ryan then said, “[c]an’t you have a word with my Smith & Wesson?” pulled out the gun
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14519 - 2005-03-31
to speak with him. Ryan then said, “[c]an’t you have a word with my Smith & Wesson?” pulled out the gun
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14519 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
NOTICE
as to “give reasonable effect to every word, in order to avoid surplusage.” Id. ¶17 WISCONSIN STAT
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=34521 - 2014-09-15
as to “give reasonable effect to every word, in order to avoid surplusage.” Id. ¶17 WISCONSIN STAT
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=34521 - 2014-09-15
State v. Shawn R. Lee
ignore the plain wording of the statute; second, it would ignore precedent bearing on the obligation
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13055 - 2005-03-31
ignore the plain wording of the statute; second, it would ignore precedent bearing on the obligation
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13055 - 2005-03-31