Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 12201 - 12210 of 30154 for consulta de causas.
Search results 12201 - 12210 of 30154 for consulta de causas.
State v. David Allen Bruski
evaluate those facts against the constitutional standard de novo. Id. ¶12 When we assess
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=21227 - 2006-03-22
evaluate those facts against the constitutional standard de novo. Id. ¶12 When we assess
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=21227 - 2006-03-22
COURT OF APPEALS
circumstances. We decide de novo whether those facts pass constitutional muster. See State v. Jerrell C.J
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=32296 - 2008-03-31
circumstances. We decide de novo whether those facts pass constitutional muster. See State v. Jerrell C.J
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=32296 - 2008-03-31
State v. John A. Gatt
, the question of whether there is probable cause to arrest is a question of law, which this court reviews de
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13938 - 2005-03-31
, the question of whether there is probable cause to arrest is a question of law, which this court reviews de
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13938 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
the standard of probable cause is a question of law that we review de novo. County of Jefferson v. Renz, 231
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=102984 - 2013-10-14
the standard of probable cause is a question of law that we review de novo. County of Jefferson v. Renz, 231
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=102984 - 2013-10-14
Cindy A. Boelter v. Kay C. Bagstad
of property to Boelter. Bagstad then requested a trial de novo in the circuit court. See Wis. Stat
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15611 - 2005-03-31
of property to Boelter. Bagstad then requested a trial de novo in the circuit court. See Wis. Stat
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15611 - 2005-03-31
State v. Ronald L. Dantuma
preclusion rule—identity of issues and parties and actual litigation of the issue—our review is de novo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15492 - 2005-03-31
preclusion rule—identity of issues and parties and actual litigation of the issue—our review is de novo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15492 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
record.” Id., ¶39. We review de novo whether summary judgment was appropriate. Id., ¶20. ¶11
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=132014 - 2017-09-21
record.” Id., ¶39. We review de novo whether summary judgment was appropriate. Id., ¶20. ¶11
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=132014 - 2017-09-21
COURT OF APPEALS
of law. Wis. Stat. § 802.08(2). Summary judgment decisions are subject to de novo review. Metropolitan
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=103820 - 2013-11-04
of law. Wis. Stat. § 802.08(2). Summary judgment decisions are subject to de novo review. Metropolitan
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=103820 - 2013-11-04
State of Wisconsin ex rel., v. David H. Schwarz
the deficiency or the prejudice prong is a question of law which this court reviews de novo. See State v. Pitsch
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13111 - 2005-03-31
the deficiency or the prejudice prong is a question of law which this court reviews de novo. See State v. Pitsch
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13111 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
de novo. Id., ¶11. ¶9 Here, the circuit court found that “the officer did articulate reasonable
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=72624 - 2014-09-15
de novo. Id., ¶11. ¶9 Here, the circuit court found that “the officer did articulate reasonable
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=72624 - 2014-09-15