Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 14721 - 14730 of 30154 for consulta de causas.
Search results 14721 - 14730 of 30154 for consulta de causas.
COURT OF APPEALS
they are clearly erroneous, but review de novo whether those facts satisfy the standard of probable cause. Renz
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=37033 - 2009-07-01
they are clearly erroneous, but review de novo whether those facts satisfy the standard of probable cause. Renz
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=37033 - 2009-07-01
COURT OF APPEALS
433. “This is a question of law that we review de novo.” Id. ¶8 Assuming the facts alleged
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=70536 - 2011-09-06
433. “This is a question of law that we review de novo.” Id. ¶8 Assuming the facts alleged
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=70536 - 2011-09-06
State v. Brandon J. Green
(1990). We pay great deference to the magistrate’s decision, rather than reviewing the matter de novo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15511 - 2005-03-31
(1990). We pay great deference to the magistrate’s decision, rather than reviewing the matter de novo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15511 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
findings of fact unless “clearly erroneous,” and reviews de novo “the application of those facts
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=807970 - 2024-05-31
findings of fact unless “clearly erroneous,” and reviews de novo “the application of those facts
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=807970 - 2024-05-31
Elyse Joransen-Hamilton Knutson v. Richard C. Knutson
and their application to a particular set of facts are questions of law that we review de novo. State v. Isaac J.R
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=2790 - 2005-03-31
and their application to a particular set of facts are questions of law that we review de novo. State v. Isaac J.R
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=2790 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
an evidentiary hearing is a question of law that we decide de novo. See id. ¶8 In sum, controlling law
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=135724 - 2017-09-21
an evidentiary hearing is a question of law that we decide de novo. See id. ¶8 In sum, controlling law
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=135724 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
Janice M. Eilola v. Linda Hattlestad
. Whether the facts satisfy a legal standard presents a question of law that we review de novo. See
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15254 - 2017-09-21
. Whether the facts satisfy a legal standard presents a question of law that we review de novo. See
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15254 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
is ultimately a legal determination, which this court decides de novo. See id. DISCUSSION Factual Basis
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=211858 - 2018-04-26
is ultimately a legal determination, which this court decides de novo. See id. DISCUSSION Factual Basis
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=211858 - 2018-04-26
[PDF]
NOTICE
of the doctrine of claim preclusion is a question of law, which this court reviews de novo. Kruckenberg v
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=27042 - 2014-09-15
of the doctrine of claim preclusion is a question of law, which this court reviews de novo. Kruckenberg v
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=27042 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
the issue now to obtain a new trial. We review the question of forfeiture de novo. State v. Counihan
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1089380 - 2026-03-12
the issue now to obtain a new trial. We review the question of forfeiture de novo. State v. Counihan
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1089380 - 2026-03-12