Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 821 - 830 of 1303 for pipe.

State v. Sheila L. Hardnett
items in her hand and said they belonged to her. Those items were a stem, a crack pipe and a tissue
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12545 - 2005-03-31

[PDF] COURT OF APPEALS
.” 1 This deputy more specifically testified that he observed: [o]n the table … like, some pipes
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=585401 - 2022-11-09

[PDF] State v. Olton Lee Dumas
, and a drug pipe. Returning to the scene after taking Dumas into custody, officers also found a .25 caliber
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10619 - 2017-09-20

[PDF] Seidel Tanning Corporation v. City of Milwaukee
, caused by the City’s negligence in failing to maintain the pipes properly. The case went to the jury
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=16035 - 2017-09-21

COURT OF APPEALS
. If there was indication of personal use: crack pipes, rolling papers, whatever. …. I would say that the vast
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=44956 - 2009-12-21

Seidel Tanning Corporation v. City of Milwaukee
main breaks which were, in turn, caused by the City’s negligence in failing to maintain the pipes
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=16035 - 2005-03-31

State v. Peter Jay Bartram
, and a smoking pipe which contained methamphetamine residue. Bartram admitted to one of the SLANT officers
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15790 - 2005-03-31

Harmony Grove Trucking & Repair, Inc. v. Columbia County Board of Adjustment
on its property over the ensuing years, including cement, concrete pipe, lumber, landscaping boulders
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=21320 - 2006-02-08

Thor C. Mikula v. Miller Brewing Company
insured for the additional insured to be covered. ¶26 In Marathon Ashland Pipe
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=17652 - 2005-05-24

[PDF] Thor C. Mikula v. Miller Brewing Company
the named insured for the additional insured to be covered. ¶26 In Marathon Ashland Pipe Line LLC v
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=17652 - 2017-09-21