Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 11591 - 11600 of 30150 for consulta de causas.

Kim DeValk v. Patricia A. Vadnais
. Following the court commissioner’s issuance of an injunction, Vadnais moved the trial court for a de novo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=16338 - 2005-03-31

COURT OF APPEALS
is a question of law that this court reviews de novo. State v. Lange, 2003 WI App 2, ¶41, 259 Wis. 2d 774, 656
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=89187 - 2012-11-13

[PDF] CA Blank Order
.” Id. However, we “review de novo the ultimate question of ‘whether the facts as found
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=888690 - 2024-12-12

2010 WI APP 7
is a question of law that we review de novo. State v. Sherry, 2004 WI App 207, ¶4, 277 Wis. 2d 194, 690 N.W.2d
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=44952 - 2010-01-26

COURT OF APPEALS
violates a defendant’s right to confrontation presents a question of law that we review de novo. See id
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=32517 - 2008-04-28

[PDF] State v. Sebastian Molina
professional judgment. Id. at 637. We review de novo whether performance was deficient and prejudiced
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=6143 - 2017-09-19

[PDF] COURT OF APPEALS
a question of law that we review de novo. State v. Wilson, 170 Wis. 2d 720, 722, 490 N.W.2d 48 (Ct. App
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=69506 - 2014-09-15

[PDF] Melvin A. Neuman v. Circuit Court for Marathon County
) is a matter of statutory interpretation, and thus is a question of law that this court reviews de novo. See
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15265 - 2017-09-21

[PDF] COURT OF APPEALS
claim is an issue appellate courts review de novo. State v. Howell, 2007 WI 75, ¶30, 301 Wis. 2d 350
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=108175 - 2017-09-21

[PDF] CA Blank Order
and therefore denied due process is a constitutional issue that we review de novo. State v. Tiepelman, 2006
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=218419 - 2018-09-05