Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 9581 - 9590 of 98574 for civil court case status online.
Search results 9581 - 9590 of 98574 for civil court case status online.
COURT OF APPEALS
and unenforceable. The case was returned to the trial court. ¶5 The County moved for summary judgment
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=33787 - 2008-08-18
and unenforceable. The case was returned to the trial court. ¶5 The County moved for summary judgment
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=33787 - 2008-08-18
COURT OF APPEALS
conclude the circuit court in the present case improperly modified the original property division in any
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=59402 - 2011-01-31
conclude the circuit court in the present case improperly modified the original property division in any
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=59402 - 2011-01-31
COURT OF APPEALS
, and of issuing a worthless check greater than $2500 in Milwaukee County Circuit Court Case No. 2011CF2291
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=114653 - 2014-06-16
, and of issuing a worthless check greater than $2500 in Milwaukee County Circuit Court Case No. 2011CF2291
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=114653 - 2014-06-16
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
, 437, 362 N.W.2d 439 (Ct. App. 1984) (holding the waiver rule applicable to cases involving civil
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=261924 - 2020-05-27
, 437, 362 N.W.2d 439 (Ct. App. 1984) (holding the waiver rule applicable to cases involving civil
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=261924 - 2020-05-27
COURT OF APPEALS
” and that, through this argument, it seeks a “departure from existing case law.” This court, however, does not have
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=101443 - 2013-08-28
” and that, through this argument, it seeks a “departure from existing case law.” This court, however, does not have
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=101443 - 2013-08-28
COURT OF APPEALS
COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND FILED October 18, 2011 A. John Voelker Acting Clerk
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=72347 - 2011-10-17
COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND FILED October 18, 2011 A. John Voelker Acting Clerk
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=72347 - 2011-10-17
[PDF]
SC Clerk-Ltr
presents information about the case filings and dispositions of the Wisconsin Supreme Court during
/sc/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=209507 - 2018-03-05
presents information about the case filings and dispositions of the Wisconsin Supreme Court during
/sc/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=209507 - 2018-03-05
[PDF]
Monthly Statistical Report - February 2018
presents information about the case filings and dispositions of the Wisconsin Supreme Court during
/sc/stats/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=209507 - 2018-03-05
presents information about the case filings and dispositions of the Wisconsin Supreme Court during
/sc/stats/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=209507 - 2018-03-05
State v. Gary J. Schmidt
custodial status would have no bearing on their decision in the case. The court once again instructed
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4611 - 2005-03-31
custodial status would have no bearing on their decision in the case. The court once again instructed
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4611 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
State v. Gary J. Schmidt
indicated that Schmidt’s custodial status would be a factor in his or her consideration of the case. All
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=4611 - 2017-09-19
indicated that Schmidt’s custodial status would be a factor in his or her consideration of the case. All
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=4611 - 2017-09-19