Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 14471 - 14480 of 30072 for de.
Search results 14471 - 14480 of 30072 for de.
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
an order of the circuit court for Waukesha County: LINDA M. VAN DE WATER, Judge. Reversed and cause
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=172312 - 2017-09-21
an order of the circuit court for Waukesha County: LINDA M. VAN DE WATER, Judge. Reversed and cause
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=172312 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
State v. Michael G.
interpretation which we review de novo. See State
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=12566 - 2017-09-21
interpretation which we review de novo. See State
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=12566 - 2017-09-21
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, 525
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15050 - 2005-03-31
probable cause is a question of law that we review de novo. See State v. Babbitt, 188 Wis.2d 349, 356, 525
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15050 - 2005-03-31
2007 WI APP 264
is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Wis. Stat. § 802.08.[2] We review summary judgments de novo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=30779 - 2007-12-18
is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Wis. Stat. § 802.08.[2] We review summary judgments de novo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=30779 - 2007-12-18
William N. Ledford v. Nancy Turcotte
that the department's explanation was adequate to justify nondisclosure. We consider de novo whether the public
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=8181 - 2005-03-31
that the department's explanation was adequate to justify nondisclosure. We consider de novo whether the public
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=8181 - 2005-03-31
State v. Douglas D.
. An appellate court is not bound by the trial court’s conclusions of law and must decide the matter de novo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15718 - 2005-03-31
. An appellate court is not bound by the trial court’s conclusions of law and must decide the matter de novo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15718 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
NOTICE
that our review is de novo. We disagree. Pursuant to WIS. STAT. § 54.68(4), the circuit court may
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=63166 - 2014-09-15
that our review is de novo. We disagree. Pursuant to WIS. STAT. § 54.68(4), the circuit court may
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=63166 - 2014-09-15
[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
[PDF]
Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Lynn Morrissey
are reviewed de novo. In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against Carroll, 2000 WI 130, ¶29, 248 Wis. 2d 662
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=16836 - 2017-09-21
are reviewed de novo. In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against Carroll, 2000 WI 130, ¶29, 248 Wis. 2d 662
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=16836 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
. Whether the circuit court erred as a matter of law is a constitutional fact which we review de novo. Id
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=83712 - 2014-09-15
. Whether the circuit court erred as a matter of law is a constitutional fact which we review de novo. Id
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=83712 - 2014-09-15