Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 14511 - 14520 of 30126 for consulta de causas.
Search results 14511 - 14520 of 30126 for consulta de causas.
[PDF]
Kelly S. Lee v. James M. Kent
.” 4 No testimony was taken at the de novo review hearing conducted by the circuit court
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=2779 - 2017-09-19
.” 4 No testimony was taken at the de novo review hearing conducted by the circuit court
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=2779 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
Shawano County v. Bermuda A. H.
of its discretion. ¶8 Statutory construction presents a question of law that this court reviews de
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=2755 - 2017-09-19
of its discretion. ¶8 Statutory construction presents a question of law that this court reviews de
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=2755 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
that we review de novo. See State v. Baron, 2009 WI 58, ¶10, 318 Wis. 2d 60, 769 N.W.2d 34
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=245224 - 2019-08-21
that we review de novo. See State v. Baron, 2009 WI 58, ¶10, 318 Wis. 2d 60, 769 N.W.2d 34
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=245224 - 2019-08-21
[PDF]
State v. Alan E. Blanchard
a judgment of the circuit court for Grant County: ROBERT P. VAN De HEY, Judge. Affirmed. Before
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=20297 - 2017-09-21
a judgment of the circuit court for Grant County: ROBERT P. VAN De HEY, Judge. Affirmed. Before
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=20297 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
State v. James W.
“clearly erroneous” standard in a termination-of- parental-rights case). We review de novo whether
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=25338 - 2017-09-21
“clearly erroneous” standard in a termination-of- parental-rights case). We review de novo whether
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=25338 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
was constitutionally ineffective is a question of law, which we review de novo. Id. ¶14 Trial counsel explained
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=72316 - 2014-09-15
was constitutionally ineffective is a question of law, which we review de novo. Id. ¶14 Trial counsel explained
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=72316 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
, she essentially asks this court to consider the issues and evidence de novo. Blue does not assert
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=164379 - 2017-09-21
, she essentially asks this court to consider the issues and evidence de novo. Blue does not assert
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=164379 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Lyle Paul Schaller
Against Carroll, 2001 WI 130, ¶29, 248 Wis. 2d 662, 636 N.W.2d 718. We review conclusions of law de
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=25072 - 2017-09-21
Against Carroll, 2001 WI 130, ¶29, 248 Wis. 2d 662, 636 N.W.2d 718. We review conclusions of law de
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=25072 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
judgment decisions de novo, applying the same methodology and legal standard employed by the circuit
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=178741 - 2017-09-21
judgment decisions de novo, applying the same methodology and legal standard employed by the circuit
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=178741 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
findings of fact unless clearly erroneous, though we review de novo the ultimate conclusion of whether
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=649011 - 2023-05-02
findings of fact unless clearly erroneous, though we review de novo the ultimate conclusion of whether
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=649011 - 2023-05-02