Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 6931 - 6940 of 17552 for ex.

COURT OF APPEALS
N.W.2d 794 (1980). DSG concedes it made this same argument in State ex rel. Gehl v. Town of Perry
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=52450 - 2010-07-21

COURT OF APPEALS
ex rel. M.L.B. v. D.G.H., 122 Wis. 2d 536, 552-53, 363 N.W.2d 419 (1985). The court should grant
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=68709 - 2011-07-27

[PDF] COURT OF APPEALS
that would be used in whole or in significant part to pay maintenance to an ex-spouse. The trustee
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=85473 - 2014-09-15

[PDF] COURT OF APPEALS
in State ex rel. Bruskewitz v. City of Madison, 2001 WI App 233, 248 Wis. 2d 297, 635 N.W.2d 797
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=70009 - 2014-09-15

[PDF] Chenequa Land Conservancy, Inc. v. Village of Hartland
what standard we should apply. ¶14 In State ex rel. First National Bank v. M&I Peoples Bank, 95 Wis
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=6889 - 2017-09-20

[PDF] WI App 45
-established methodology articulated in State ex rel. Kalal v. Circuit Court for Dane County, 2004 WI 58, 271
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=697507 - 2023-10-11

Northland Whitehall Apartments Limited Partnership v. City of Whitehall Board of Review
did not determine the property’s fair market value. See State ex rel. Kesselman v. Sturtevant, 133
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=21521 - 2006-04-25

[PDF] Northland Whitehall Apartments Limited Partnership v. City of Whitehall Board of Review
of the property was $590,300, its “equalized value” was apparently $658,800. We explained in State ex rel
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=21521 - 2017-09-21

[PDF] State v. Rolando A. Gil
court also acknowledged that the precedent, specifically State ex rel. Arnold v. County Court, 51
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10055 - 2017-09-19

[PDF] State v. Joshua L. Howland
the district attorney’s office and the Division of Community Corrections borders on ex parte communications
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=5529 - 2017-09-19