Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 10561 - 10570 of 30177 for de.
Search results 10561 - 10570 of 30177 for de.
State v. Rodney Calhoun
, whether the State violated the plea agreement is a question of law which we review de novo. See State v
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9761 - 2005-03-31
, whether the State violated the plea agreement is a question of law which we review de novo. See State v
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9761 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
of the parties.’” Id. (citation omitted). Whether a new factor exists is a question of law we review de novo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=143668 - 2015-06-29
of the parties.’” Id. (citation omitted). Whether a new factor exists is a question of law we review de novo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=143668 - 2015-06-29
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
-Naranjo presents a question of law that this court reviews de novo. Kletzien, 331 Wis. 2d 640, ¶9
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1091326 - 2026-03-18
-Naranjo presents a question of law that this court reviews de novo. Kletzien, 331 Wis. 2d 640, ¶9
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1091326 - 2026-03-18
COURT OF APPEALS
standards is a legal determination that this court decides de novo. Wis. Stat. § 805.17(2); State v. Pitsch
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=141758 - 2015-05-13
standards is a legal determination that this court decides de novo. Wis. Stat. § 805.17(2); State v. Pitsch
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=141758 - 2015-05-13
Stephen V. Sztukowski v. South Hills Golf & Country Club
of summary judgment is de novo, and we use the same methodology as the circuit court. See M&I First Nat’l
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=2341 - 2005-03-31
of summary judgment is de novo, and we use the same methodology as the circuit court. See M&I First Nat’l
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=2341 - 2005-03-31
State v. Brian C. Demeuse
deference to the issuing judge’s decision, rather than reviewing the matter de novo. Id. ¶9 Our
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=5288 - 2005-03-31
deference to the issuing judge’s decision, rather than reviewing the matter de novo. Id. ¶9 Our
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=5288 - 2005-03-31
William Biewer v. Progressive Northern Insurance Company
Progressive. ¶6 We review summary judgment decisions de novo, applying the same methodology
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=5087 - 2005-03-31
Progressive. ¶6 We review summary judgment decisions de novo, applying the same methodology
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=5087 - 2005-03-31
State v. Karen A.O.
. APPEAL from orders of the circuit court for Waupaca County: JOHN A. DES JARDINS, Judge. Reversed
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9930 - 2005-03-31
. APPEAL from orders of the circuit court for Waupaca County: JOHN A. DES JARDINS, Judge. Reversed
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9930 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
State v. Juan Jesus S.
to be reviewed de novo. See State v. Anderson, 219 Wis.2d 740, 747, 580 N.W.2d 329, 332 (1998). We
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=14480 - 2017-09-21
to be reviewed de novo. See State v. Anderson, 219 Wis.2d 740, 747, 580 N.W.2d 329, 332 (1998). We
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=14480 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
State v. Gary Cembrowski
of law, which this court reviews de novo. State v. James, 176 Wis.2d 230, 237, 500 N.W.2d 345, 348 (Ct
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=12111 - 2017-09-21
of law, which this court reviews de novo. State v. James, 176 Wis.2d 230, 237, 500 N.W.2d 345, 348 (Ct
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=12111 - 2017-09-21