Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 13611 - 13620 of 30097 for de.
Search results 13611 - 13620 of 30097 for de.
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
is a question of law, subject to de novo review. State v. Smith, 2012 WI 91, ¶24, 342 Wis. 2d 710, 817 N.W.2d
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1078110 - 2026-02-17
is a question of law, subject to de novo review. State v. Smith, 2012 WI 91, ¶24, 342 Wis. 2d 710, 817 N.W.2d
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1078110 - 2026-02-17
[PDF]
State v. Donald G. Kester
to established facts is de novo. See State v. Turner, 136 Wis.2d 333, 344, 401 N.W.2d 827, 832 (1987
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=11168 - 2017-09-19
to established facts is de novo. See State v. Turner, 136 Wis.2d 333, 344, 401 N.W.2d 827, 832 (1987
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=11168 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
State v. Margaret C.
a question of law this court reviews de novo. See Patricia A.P., 195 Wis.2d at 862, 537 N.W.2d at 49-50
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=14792 - 2017-09-21
a question of law this court reviews de novo. See Patricia A.P., 195 Wis.2d at 862, 537 N.W.2d at 49-50
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=14792 - 2017-09-21
COURT OF APPEALS
Montgomery’s due-process rights were violated are legal questions subject to de novo review. See Waste
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=45574 - 2010-01-11
Montgomery’s due-process rights were violated are legal questions subject to de novo review. See Waste
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=45574 - 2010-01-11
COURT OF APPEALS
. Stat. § 101.11, presenting a question of law that we review de novo. See Barry v. Employers Mut. Cas
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=37948 - 2009-07-21
. Stat. § 101.11, presenting a question of law that we review de novo. See Barry v. Employers Mut. Cas
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=37948 - 2009-07-21
[PDF]
City of Wautoma v. Richard A. Wehe
probable cause is a question of law that we review de novo. See State v. Babbitt, 188 Wis.2d 349, 356
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15050 - 2017-09-21
probable cause is a question of law that we review de novo. See State v. Babbitt, 188 Wis.2d 349, 356
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15050 - 2017-09-21
Wisconsin Gas Company v. Allos, Inc.
de novo. See Lessor v. Wangelin, 221 Wis.2d 659, 666, 586 N.W.2d 1, 4 (Ct. App. 1998
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14233 - 2005-03-31
de novo. See Lessor v. Wangelin, 221 Wis.2d 659, 666, 586 N.W.2d 1, 4 (Ct. App. 1998
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14233 - 2005-03-31
State v. Earl F. Beaver
. VanLaarhoven, 2001 WI App 275 at ¶5. Despite our de novo standard of review, we nonetheless value the trial
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4143 - 2005-03-31
. VanLaarhoven, 2001 WI App 275 at ¶5. Despite our de novo standard of review, we nonetheless value the trial
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4143 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
County of Clark v. Labor and Industry Review Commission
in misconduct under § 108.04(5), STATS., is a legal conclusion, which we review de novo. Bernhardt, 207 Wis
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13631 - 2017-09-21
in misconduct under § 108.04(5), STATS., is a legal conclusion, which we review de novo. Bernhardt, 207 Wis
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13631 - 2017-09-21
Mary A. Klovers v. City of Beaver Dam
de novo in circuit court. See generally, Nankin, 2001 WI 92 at ¶¶24-25 (differences between
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=3640 - 2005-03-31
de novo in circuit court. See generally, Nankin, 2001 WI 92 at ¶¶24-25 (differences between
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=3640 - 2005-03-31