Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 6981 - 6990 of 7573 for yes.

State v. William A. Silva
to the first two questions is “yes”; the answer to the third question is “no.” The evidence was properly
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=5320 - 2005-03-31

2011 WI APP 13
? No. Again I say no. She played with her, yes. She played with her like she was a doll, not like a mother
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=57550 - 2012-01-22

State v. Gabriel Derango
. Derango then asked her if she was interested in modeling in magazines and catalogs. When Jessica said yes
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=17372 - 2005-03-31

[PDF] State v. Dennis J. Reitter
report, Deputy Sipher observed: I explained to Reitter 5 times that I needed a yes or no answer
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=17383 - 2017-09-21

State v. Patrick E. Richter
? A. Yes, I did. Q. What concerns did you have? A. I felt that there could be possibly some
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=17398 - 2005-03-31

[PDF] Guy Riccitelli, M.D. v. Fredrik Broekhuizen, M.D.
. Broekhuizen and Hagarty] are trying to have it both ways: No, we aren’t [state employees]. Yes, we
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13592 - 2017-09-21

[PDF] COURT OF APPEALS
during Sara’s direct examination: Q And is everything you’re telling us here today the truth? A Yes
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=275131 - 2020-08-04

COURT OF APPEALS
Office and we’re out of here. So, yes, I did on my own motion reopen the matter, but first of all, I
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=28961 - 2007-06-26

Guy Riccitelli, M.D. v. Fredrik Broekhuizen, M.D.
employees]. Yes, we are.” [11] Regarding Dr. Hagarty, Dr. Riccitelli concedes that she “was not a party
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13592 - 2005-03-31

Mary J. Gittel v. Ruth M. Abram
regarding undue influence, and Abram’s attorney answered yes. ¶11 At the close of the hearing
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=3893 - 2005-03-31