Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 66511 - 66520 of 83494 for case codes/1000.
Search results 66511 - 66520 of 83494 for case codes/1000.
State v. Brian W. Easton
in this case are not in dispute, and we decide de novo whether those facts “meet the appropriate legal
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=3102 - 2005-03-31
in this case are not in dispute, and we decide de novo whether those facts “meet the appropriate legal
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=3102 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
State v. Kenneth J. Hoefer
and experienced observer. We cannot disagree with the trial court’s observation that this is a close case
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13535 - 2017-09-21
and experienced observer. We cannot disagree with the trial court’s observation that this is a close case
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13535 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
at conference that this case is appropriate for summary disposition. We No. 2020AP911 2 reject
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=657529 - 2023-05-16
at conference that this case is appropriate for summary disposition. We No. 2020AP911 2 reject
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=657529 - 2023-05-16
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
conclude at conference No. 2022AP1381 2 that this case is appropriate for summary
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=693663 - 2023-08-23
conclude at conference No. 2022AP1381 2 that this case is appropriate for summary
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=693663 - 2023-08-23
State v. Kenneth J. Hoefer
observation that this is a close case. But neither can we disagree with the court’s resolution of the issues
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13535 - 2005-03-31
observation that this is a close case. But neither can we disagree with the court’s resolution of the issues
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13535 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
Racine County v. Mary Jane S.
) Except in the case of a minor who is alleged to be developmentally disabled, has either been determined
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=6278 - 2017-09-19
) Except in the case of a minor who is alleged to be developmentally disabled, has either been determined
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=6278 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
Paul Kelnhofer v. Village of Ephraim
that the Village had no power under its ordinances to require EIA's. In cases of certiorari review, trial
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=8163 - 2017-09-19
that the Village had no power under its ordinances to require EIA's. In cases of certiorari review, trial
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=8163 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
, we No. 2016AP2403 2 conclude at conference that this case is appropriate for summary
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=207720 - 2018-01-25
, we No. 2016AP2403 2 conclude at conference that this case is appropriate for summary
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=207720 - 2018-01-25
CA Blank Order
paraphernalia. Meindel ultimately agreed to resolve his case with a plea bargain. In exchange for his pleas
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=143331 - 2015-06-16
paraphernalia. Meindel ultimately agreed to resolve his case with a plea bargain. In exchange for his pleas
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=143331 - 2015-06-16
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
that was the case. The circuit court found that these statements were “patently unbelievable” due to the nature
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=912145 - 2025-02-11
that was the case. The circuit court found that these statements were “patently unbelievable” due to the nature
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=912145 - 2025-02-11