Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 911 - 920 of 2406 for nys.
Search results 911 - 920 of 2406 for nys.
[PDF]
James P. Zientek v. Robert C. Smith
: [A]ny person who submits for filing, docketing or recording ... any other instrument relating
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=9133 - 2017-09-19
: [A]ny person who submits for filing, docketing or recording ... any other instrument relating
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=9133 - 2017-09-19
Wisconsin State Telephone Association v. Public Service Commission of Wisconsin
as: "[A]ny telecommunications utility or a successor in interest of a telecommunications utility
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=7778 - 2005-03-31
as: "[A]ny telecommunications utility or a successor in interest of a telecommunications utility
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=7778 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
Daniel L. Sarauer v. Robin C. Sarauer
the trial court to grant relief from a judgment for “[a]ny other reasons justifying relief.” Relief under
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=12421 - 2017-09-21
the trial court to grant relief from a judgment for “[a]ny other reasons justifying relief.” Relief under
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=12421 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
). Subsection (1)(h) is a catch-all provision that allows a court to vacate a judgment for “[a]ny other
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=213609 - 2018-05-30
). Subsection (1)(h) is a catch-all provision that allows a court to vacate a judgment for “[a]ny other
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=213609 - 2018-05-30
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
) provides, in pertinent part: [a]ny employer who without reasonable cause refuses to rehire
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=87181 - 2014-09-15
) provides, in pertinent part: [a]ny employer who without reasonable cause refuses to rehire
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=87181 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
State v. Jack E. Thurk
sentence in § 343.305(2), states that “[a]ny person who is on duty time with respect to a commercial
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13561 - 2017-09-21
sentence in § 343.305(2), states that “[a]ny person who is on duty time with respect to a commercial
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13561 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
in the future” and “[a]ny other factor that the court determines may be relevant to the particular case.” Sec
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=713899 - 2023-10-11
in the future” and “[a]ny other factor that the court determines may be relevant to the particular case.” Sec
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=713899 - 2023-10-11
COURT OF APPEALS
that “[a]ny assistance rendered by counsel forced on an accused is therefore ‘ineffective’ and prejudice need
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=58813 - 2011-01-11
that “[a]ny assistance rendered by counsel forced on an accused is therefore ‘ineffective’ and prejudice need
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=58813 - 2011-01-11
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
of that property.” “[A]ny rights [Campbell] had by virtue of being an owner are lost” as to that strip
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=204936 - 2017-12-14
of that property.” “[A]ny rights [Campbell] had by virtue of being an owner are lost” as to that strip
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=204936 - 2017-12-14
COURT OF APPEALS
. § 102.35(3) provides, in pertinent part: [a]ny employer who without reasonable cause refuses to rehire
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=87181 - 2012-09-17
. § 102.35(3) provides, in pertinent part: [a]ny employer who without reasonable cause refuses to rehire
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=87181 - 2012-09-17