Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 12851 - 12860 of 30115 for de.
Search results 12851 - 12860 of 30115 for de.
[PDF]
Lynn Wonka v. Samuel Cari
appeal. STANDARD OF REVIEW ¶9 We review summary judgment dispositions de novo and apply the same
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=3522 - 2017-09-19
appeal. STANDARD OF REVIEW ¶9 We review summary judgment dispositions de novo and apply the same
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=3522 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
State v. Timothy L. Olson
is entitled to sentence credit is an issue we consider de novo. See State v. Seeley, 212 Wis.2d 75, 81, 567
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=14052 - 2014-09-15
is entitled to sentence credit is an issue we consider de novo. See State v. Seeley, 212 Wis.2d 75, 81, 567
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=14052 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
State v. Willie S. Gray, Jr.
entitle a defendant to relief is a question of law that we review de novo. However
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=14056 - 2014-09-15
entitle a defendant to relief is a question of law that we review de novo. However
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=14056 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
State v. Jeriline Campbell
we review de novo.” State v. Young, 212 Wis. 2d 417, 424, 569 N.W.2d 84 (Ct. App. 1997). ¶3
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=3151 - 2017-09-19
we review de novo.” State v. Young, 212 Wis. 2d 417, 424, 569 N.W.2d 84 (Ct. App. 1997). ¶3
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=3151 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
to deny Hooker’s postconviction motion is the same under both lines of cases: de novo. See State v
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=63723 - 2014-09-15
to deny Hooker’s postconviction motion is the same under both lines of cases: de novo. See State v
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=63723 - 2014-09-15
Monika Gasper v. Andrew and Nancy Parbs
This case requires us to construe Wis. Stat. § 174.02(1)(b) and apply it to undisputed facts. We do this de
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=3018 - 2005-03-31
This case requires us to construe Wis. Stat. § 174.02(1)(b) and apply it to undisputed facts. We do this de
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=3018 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
: (1) [t]he person [ha]s ma[de] significant progress in treatment [that] can be sustained while
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1084604 - 2026-03-04
: (1) [t]he person [ha]s ma[de] significant progress in treatment [that] can be sustained while
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1084604 - 2026-03-04
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
for summary judgment. ¶6 We review a circuit court’s grant of summary judgment de novo. Hardy v
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=142982 - 2017-09-21
for summary judgment. ¶6 We review a circuit court’s grant of summary judgment de novo. Hardy v
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=142982 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
State v. Randy J. Hull
is a question of law we decide de novo. See State v. Phillips, 218 Wis.2d 180, 195, 577 N.W.2d 794, 801
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13698 - 2014-09-15
is a question of law we decide de novo. See State v. Phillips, 218 Wis.2d 180, 195, 577 N.W.2d 794, 801
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13698 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
N.W.2d 912 (1998)). We review de novo whether a defendant was denied due process at sentencing. Id
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=157817 - 2017-09-21
N.W.2d 912 (1998)). We review de novo whether a defendant was denied due process at sentencing. Id
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=157817 - 2017-09-21