Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 6721 - 6730 of 20931 for word.
Search results 6721 - 6730 of 20931 for word.
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
, that is, the interpretation that did not rely on title alone. In other words, we resolved the ambiguity in favor
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=80148 - 2014-09-15
, that is, the interpretation that did not rely on title alone. In other words, we resolved the ambiguity in favor
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=80148 - 2014-09-15
COURT OF APPEALS
he was searching, and he was acting cautiously.” In order words, while Harris argues Neibauer’s
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=50188 - 2010-05-24
he was searching, and he was acting cautiously.” In order words, while Harris argues Neibauer’s
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=50188 - 2010-05-24
State v. Pablo R.
in § 938.18(2) does not do away with the strictures set forth in § 938.18(1). In other words, Pablo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=2386 - 2005-03-31
in § 938.18(2) does not do away with the strictures set forth in § 938.18(1). In other words, Pablo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=2386 - 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
State v. George Taylor
worded order, it ruled: Based on this decision [Erickson], the respondent’s remaining contention raised
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13870 - 2005-03-31
worded order, it ruled: Based on this decision [Erickson], the respondent’s remaining contention raised
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13870 - 2005-03-31
Milwaukee District Council 48 v. City of Milwaukee
of the question submitted….” Although the City acknowledges that the parties were unable to agree on the wording
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15841 - 2005-03-31
of the question submitted….” Although the City acknowledges that the parties were unable to agree on the wording
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15841 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
done without his word giving” and that Wheeler was “the only person to give word to any other GD
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=153573 - 2017-09-21
done without his word giving” and that Wheeler was “the only person to give word to any other GD
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=153573 - 2017-09-21
COURT OF APPEALS
and 2007.” In other words, the trial court explicitly stated that Dianne and Michael would each
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=69171 - 2011-08-08
and 2007.” In other words, the trial court explicitly stated that Dianne and Michael would each
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=69171 - 2011-08-08
Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Susan L. Schuster
shall be printed in the upper left corner of the check. Trust account checks shall include the words
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=21692 - 2006-03-06
shall be printed in the upper left corner of the check. Trust account checks shall include the words
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=21692 - 2006-03-06
World Wide Prosthetic Supply, Inc. v. Robert J. Mikulsky
World Wide argues that under the plain words of the statute, its damages “may include both the actual
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=2752 - 2005-03-31
World Wide argues that under the plain words of the statute, its damages “may include both the actual
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=2752 - 2005-03-31