Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 70781 - 70790 of 83655 for case search.
Search results 70781 - 70790 of 83655 for case search.
State v. David J. Pizzini
that the prosecutor’s conduct in this case was intentional. However, the circuit court found that the failure
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14036 - 2005-03-31
that the prosecutor’s conduct in this case was intentional. However, the circuit court found that the failure
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14036 - 2005-03-31
CA Blank Order
of conviction.” Based upon our review of the briefs and record, we conclude at conference that this case
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=98527 - 2013-06-23
of conviction.” Based upon our review of the briefs and record, we conclude at conference that this case
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=98527 - 2013-06-23
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
that this case is appropriate for summary disposition. See WIS. STAT. RULE 809.21(1) (2011-12). 1 We affirm
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=112901 - 2017-09-21
that this case is appropriate for summary disposition. See WIS. STAT. RULE 809.21(1) (2011-12). 1 We affirm
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=112901 - 2017-09-21
CA Blank Order
and record, we conclude at conference that this case is appropriate for summary disposition. See Wis. Stat
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=93535 - 2013-02-27
and record, we conclude at conference that this case is appropriate for summary disposition. See Wis. Stat
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=93535 - 2013-02-27
[PDF]
Dale D. Malueg v. Gregory D. Malueg
¶4 We remand the case to the trial court for a determination of the amount and allocation
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=14812 - 2017-09-21
¶4 We remand the case to the trial court for a determination of the amount and allocation
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=14812 - 2017-09-21
Supreme Court Pending Rules Petitions
for original action cases involving state legislative redistricting, Court’s own motion 10/14/2002 03-04
/sc/pendscr/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=21198 - 2006-01-30
for original action cases involving state legislative redistricting, Court’s own motion 10/14/2002 03-04
/sc/pendscr/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=21198 - 2006-01-30
Supreme Court Pending Rules Petitions
In the matter of the adoption of procedures for original action cases involving state legislative redistricting
/sc/pendscr/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=25056 - 2006-05-01
In the matter of the adoption of procedures for original action cases involving state legislative redistricting
/sc/pendscr/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=25056 - 2006-05-01
COURT OF APPEALS
cases; and (3) the party to be estopped convinced the first court to adopt its position. Id. (citation
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=31326 - 2007-12-26
cases; and (3) the party to be estopped convinced the first court to adopt its position. Id. (citation
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=31326 - 2007-12-26
February 1, 2000
a party or lawyer in a case made contribution effecting a judicial campaign 10/28/2009 08-25 In the Matter
/sc/pendscr/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=48452 - 2010-03-24
a party or lawyer in a case made contribution effecting a judicial campaign 10/28/2009 08-25 In the Matter
/sc/pendscr/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=48452 - 2010-03-24
[PDF]
96-10 Rules of Appellate Procedure 809.23(4)
for filing a petition for review. As in the case of reconsideration of a Court of Appeals decision
/sc/rulhear/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1048 - 2017-09-20
for filing a petition for review. As in the case of reconsideration of a Court of Appeals decision
/sc/rulhear/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1048 - 2017-09-20