Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 9181 - 9190 of 65135 for or b.
Search results 9181 - 9190 of 65135 for or b.
[PDF]
NOTICE
the prior calibration test on the Intoximeter. See WIS. STAT. § 343.305(6)(b)3. (technicians must certify
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=31382 - 2014-09-15
the prior calibration test on the Intoximeter. See WIS. STAT. § 343.305(6)(b)3. (technicians must certify
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=31382 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
v. Brenda B., 2011 WI 6, ¶41, 331 Wis. 2d 310, 795 N.W.2d 730. A plea must be made knowingly
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=958864 - 2025-05-20
v. Brenda B., 2011 WI 6, ¶41, 331 Wis. 2d 310, 795 N.W.2d 730. A plea must be made knowingly
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=958864 - 2025-05-20
COURT OF APPEALS
William (Billy) Parker, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Sappi Cloquet, LLC d/b/a Sappi Fine
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=117398 - 2014-07-21
William (Billy) Parker, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Sappi Cloquet, LLC d/b/a Sappi Fine
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=117398 - 2014-07-21
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
is that the County failed to submit sufficient evidence to prove he was dangerous under WIS. STAT. § 51.20(1)(a)2.b
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=544383 - 2022-07-20
is that the County failed to submit sufficient evidence to prove he was dangerous under WIS. STAT. § 51.20(1)(a)2.b
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=544383 - 2022-07-20
Donald Savinski v. Karren Kimble
of the records. We conclude the written denial of his request was sufficient under § 19.35(4)(a) and (b), Stats
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13278 - 2005-03-31
of the records. We conclude the written denial of his request was sufficient under § 19.35(4)(a) and (b), Stats
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13278 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
)(b), 895.446(1) (2011-12).[2] We conclude that, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=116172 - 2014-07-02
)(b), 895.446(1) (2011-12).[2] We conclude that, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=116172 - 2014-07-02
Wickes Lumber Company v. Gary D. Everett
, d/b/a Keeker & Sons Construction, Defendant-Respondent, v. Newport Builders
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=19162 - 2005-08-02
, d/b/a Keeker & Sons Construction, Defendant-Respondent, v. Newport Builders
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=19162 - 2005-08-02
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
. APPEAL from an order of the circuit court for Milwaukee County: MARSHALL B. MURRAY, Judge. Affirmed
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=147183 - 2017-09-21
. APPEAL from an order of the circuit court for Milwaukee County: MARSHALL B. MURRAY, Judge. Affirmed
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=147183 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
State v. Ruven Seibert
§ 980.06(2)(b), STATS., 2 is a discretionary act because it involves consideration of interrelated
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=12970 - 2017-09-21
§ 980.06(2)(b), STATS., 2 is a discretionary act because it involves consideration of interrelated
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=12970 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
NOTICE
for Dane County: SARAH B. O’BRIEN, Judge. Affirmed. ¶1 BRIDGE, J.1 In December 2005, Carter
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=34126 - 2014-09-15
for Dane County: SARAH B. O’BRIEN, Judge. Affirmed. ¶1 BRIDGE, J.1 In December 2005, Carter
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=34126 - 2014-09-15