Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 76571 - 76580 of 91841 for 1.
Search results 76571 - 76580 of 91841 for 1.
COURT OF APPEALS
: john a. des jardins, Judge. Affirmed. Before Hoover, P.J., Peterson and Brunner, JJ. ¶1
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=30533 - 2007-09-30
: john a. des jardins, Judge. Affirmed. Before Hoover, P.J., Peterson and Brunner, JJ. ¶1
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=30533 - 2007-09-30
CA Blank Order
the burglary charge.[1] Based upon our review of the briefs and record, we conclude at conference
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=142690 - 2012-09-04
the burglary charge.[1] Based upon our review of the briefs and record, we conclude at conference
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=142690 - 2012-09-04
CA Blank Order
Wis. Stat. Rule 809.21 (2011-12).[1] We affirm the order of the circuit court. In February 1997
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=133147 - 2015-01-20
Wis. Stat. Rule 809.21 (2011-12).[1] We affirm the order of the circuit court. In February 1997
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=133147 - 2015-01-20
CA Blank Order
has filed a no-merit report pursuant to Wis. Stat. Rule 809.32 (2011-12)[1] and Anders v. California
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=110240 - 2012-11-04
has filed a no-merit report pursuant to Wis. Stat. Rule 809.32 (2011-12)[1] and Anders v. California
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=110240 - 2012-11-04
John O. Norquist v. Cate Zeuske
Court REVIEW of a decision of the Court of Appeals. Dismissed. ¶1 PER CURIAM
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=17439 - 2005-03-31
Court REVIEW of a decision of the Court of Appeals. Dismissed. ¶1 PER CURIAM
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=17439 - 2005-03-31
Daniel E. Jensen v. Commissioner of Securities of the State of Wisconsin
to appeal, however, has now passed. Section 227.53(1)(a)2., Stats. Jensen argues that Universal Org. of Mun
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=11814 - 2005-03-31
to appeal, however, has now passed. Section 227.53(1)(a)2., Stats. Jensen argues that Universal Org. of Mun
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=11814 - 2005-03-31
State v. Daniel L. Hanson
Cane, C.J., Hoover, P.J., and Peterson, J. ¶1 PER CURIAM. Daniel Hanson
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4806 - 2005-03-31
Cane, C.J., Hoover, P.J., and Peterson, J. ¶1 PER CURIAM. Daniel Hanson
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4806 - 2005-03-31
CA Blank Order
(2011-12),[1] concluding there is no basis for challenging the sentence imposed after revocation
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=96337 - 2013-05-06
(2011-12),[1] concluding there is no basis for challenging the sentence imposed after revocation
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=96337 - 2013-05-06
Elaine M. Parodo v. Jerry J. Parodo
. Before Dykman, Roggensack and Deininger, JJ. ¶1 PER CURIAM. Jerry Parodo appeals
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4736 - 2012-06-26
. Before Dykman, Roggensack and Deininger, JJ. ¶1 PER CURIAM. Jerry Parodo appeals
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4736 - 2012-06-26
CA Blank Order
809.21 (2011-12).[1] We affirm. The circuit court denied Davis’s motion as untimely. In his reply brief
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=103112 - 2013-10-14
809.21 (2011-12).[1] We affirm. The circuit court denied Davis’s motion as untimely. In his reply brief
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=103112 - 2013-10-14