Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 12821 - 12830 of 30154 for consulta de causas.
Search results 12821 - 12830 of 30154 for consulta de causas.
State v. Scott R. Weber
to construe §§ 973.09(1)(b) and 973.20, Stats. Statutory construction is a question of law that we review de
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14438 - 2005-03-31
to construe §§ 973.09(1)(b) and 973.20, Stats. Statutory construction is a question of law that we review de
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14438 - 2005-03-31
State v. John W. Moore
that this court reviews de novo. See Bantz v. Montgomery Estates, Inc., 163 Wis.2d 973, 978, 473 N.W.2d 506, 508
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=11607 - 2005-03-31
that this court reviews de novo. See Bantz v. Montgomery Estates, Inc., 163 Wis.2d 973, 978, 473 N.W.2d 506, 508
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=11607 - 2005-03-31
State v. Jack R. Martinsen
determination of whether the trial court’s interpretation of the statute was proper is based on a de novo review
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=11605 - 2005-03-31
determination of whether the trial court’s interpretation of the statute was proper is based on a de novo review
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=11605 - 2005-03-31
State v. Anthony Harris
de novo. State v. Krier, 165 Wis.2d 673, 676, 478 N.W.2d 63, 65 (Ct. App. 1991). Terry v. Ohio, 392
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9176 - 2005-03-31
de novo. State v. Krier, 165 Wis.2d 673, 676, 478 N.W.2d 63, 65 (Ct. App. 1991). Terry v. Ohio, 392
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9176 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
State v. Deborah A. Neas
of a complaint is a matter of law, which we review de novo. See State v. Adams, 152 Wis.2d 68, 74, 447 N.W.2d
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=11563 - 2017-09-19
of a complaint is a matter of law, which we review de novo. See State v. Adams, 152 Wis.2d 68, 74, 447 N.W.2d
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=11563 - 2017-09-19
Karl Julius James v. Gary R. McCaughtry
693, 694 (Ct. App. 1989) (appellate court conducts de novo review of record) and Van Ermen v. DHSS, 84
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12811 - 2005-03-31
693, 694 (Ct. App. 1989) (appellate court conducts de novo review of record) and Van Ermen v. DHSS, 84
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12811 - 2005-03-31
Darryl Kusz v. The Home Insurance Company
. Although we value a trial court’s decision on summary judgment questions, our standard of review is de novo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12985 - 2005-03-31
. Although we value a trial court’s decision on summary judgment questions, our standard of review is de novo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12985 - 2005-03-31
State v. Sandra L. Barrette
.2d 119, 132, 454 N.W.2d 780, 785 (1990). The standard of review is not de novo, but rather gives
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12919 - 2005-03-31
.2d 119, 132, 454 N.W.2d 780, 785 (1990). The standard of review is not de novo, but rather gives
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12919 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
discussion below. STANDARD OF REVIEW ¶7 This court reviews summary judgment decisions de novo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=81567 - 2012-04-25
discussion below. STANDARD OF REVIEW ¶7 This court reviews summary judgment decisions de novo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=81567 - 2012-04-25
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
agreement. Sesing appeals. DISCUSSION ¶8 We review summary judgment decisions de novo, applying
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=251102 - 2019-12-11
agreement. Sesing appeals. DISCUSSION ¶8 We review summary judgment decisions de novo, applying
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=251102 - 2019-12-11