Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 3381 - 3390 of 94446 for civil court case status online.

[PDF] October case of the month
Dairy Farm This case, taken on a petition to bypass the Court of Appeals, asks the Supreme Court
/courts/resources/teacher/casemonth/docs/oct19.pdf - 2019-10-24

[PDF] October case of the month
and dismissed it from the case. The circuit court explained, “Based on the undisputed facts in this case
/courts/resources/teacher/casemonth/docs/oct12.pdf - 2012-10-04

[PDF] Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Richard Bolte - 2003AP001184
2005 WI 132 SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN CASE NO.: 2003AP1184-D COMPLETE TITLE
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=19057 - 2017-09-21

Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Richard Bolte - 2003AP001184
2005 WI 132 Supreme Court of Wisconsin Case No.: 2003AP1184-D Complete Title
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=19057 - 2005-07-18

[PDF] State v. Trina J. - 1996AP001615
accompanied her on July 21. The trial court vacated the TPR and set a status date for November 15, 1995
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10923 - 2017-09-20

State v. Trina J. - 1996AP001615
in this case resulting from the lack of trial court findings at the final status hearing. A few more minutes
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10923 - 2005-03-31

State v. Sheryl D. Stuckey - 1997AP002285
against her only in a civil action. The trial court denied Stuckey’s motion
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12850 - 2005-03-31

[PDF] State v. Sheryl D. Stuckey - 1997AP002285
permitting the State to proceed against her only in a civil action. The trial court denied Stuckey’s
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=12850 - 2017-09-21

COURT OF APPEALS
the claim. ¶16 The scheduling order in this case required the parties to follow local circuit court
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=77326 - 2012-01-30

COURT OF APPEALS
or a receiver. “An appellate court should decide cases on the narrowest possible grounds.” State v. Castillo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=66433 - 2011-06-22