Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 69611 - 69620 of 83432 for case codes/1000.
Search results 69611 - 69620 of 83432 for case codes/1000.
Elton V.L. v. Cheryl V.L.
brief fall out of this case.[1] Because the propriety of summer and holiday visitation had already been
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=11876 - 2005-03-31
brief fall out of this case.[1] Because the propriety of summer and holiday visitation had already been
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=11876 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
NOTICE
of law we review de novo. Id. ¶11 In this case, the judgment provides “Steven M. Koch and David J
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=59467 - 2014-09-15
of law we review de novo. Id. ¶11 In this case, the judgment provides “Steven M. Koch and David J
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=59467 - 2014-09-15
COURT OF APPEALS
to this court dated October 30, 2012, asking that we “re-docket” his case. He explained that his lawyer did
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=104150 - 2013-11-12
to this court dated October 30, 2012, asking that we “re-docket” his case. He explained that his lawyer did
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=104150 - 2013-11-12
COURT OF APPEALS
confused this case with another incident and that no surveillance video existed. Discussion ¶14
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=86078 - 2012-08-13
confused this case with another incident and that no surveillance video existed. Discussion ¶14
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=86078 - 2012-08-13
State v. James A. Newson
the letter. ¶6 Newson was charged as noted and the case was presented to the jury
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=7322 - 2005-03-31
the letter. ¶6 Newson was charged as noted and the case was presented to the jury
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=7322 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
NOTICE
not discuss all of these secondary factors, but rather only those relevant to the particular case. Id
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=33100 - 2014-09-15
not discuss all of these secondary factors, but rather only those relevant to the particular case. Id
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=33100 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
“contraband.” The parties further agree that “contraband,” for purposes of this case, means any item
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=93766 - 2014-09-15
“contraband.” The parties further agree that “contraband,” for purposes of this case, means any item
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=93766 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
Dorothy McGrane v. John O'Brien
agreement. William’s attorney in the divorce case averred that he would have advised William against
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=24800 - 2017-09-21
agreement. William’s attorney in the divorce case averred that he would have advised William against
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=24800 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
Brookhouse’s motion, dismissed the case with prejudice, and denied the Bullamores’ oral motion to replead
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=128303 - 2017-09-21
Brookhouse’s motion, dismissed the case with prejudice, and denied the Bullamores’ oral motion to replead
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=128303 - 2017-09-21
COURT OF APPEALS
to argue the merits of his case, that would have been appropriate at the Municipal Court trial, had he been
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=93963 - 2013-03-11
to argue the merits of his case, that would have been appropriate at the Municipal Court trial, had he been
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=93963 - 2013-03-11