Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 14871 - 14880 of 30072 for de.
Search results 14871 - 14880 of 30072 for de.
[PDF]
Edward A. Hannan v. Thomas W. Godfrey
of law, which this court reviews de novo. WISCONSIN STAT. § 805.06 authorizes a court to appoint
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15460 - 2017-09-21
of law, which this court reviews de novo. WISCONSIN STAT. § 805.06 authorizes a court to appoint
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15460 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
NOTICE
the lowest, it was error for the court to use $120,000.00.” We conclude this difference is de minimus
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=35394 - 2014-09-15
the lowest, it was error for the court to use $120,000.00.” We conclude this difference is de minimus
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=35394 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
that decision de novo. Olson v. Farrar, 2012 WI 3, ¶24, 338 Wis. 2d 215, 809 N.W.2d 1. ¶7 “Insurance
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=668031 - 2023-06-13
that decision de novo. Olson v. Farrar, 2012 WI 3, ¶24, 338 Wis. 2d 215, 809 N.W.2d 1. ¶7 “Insurance
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=668031 - 2023-06-13
Willow Creek Ranch, L.L.C. v. Town of Shelby
. Discussion We review orders granting summary judgment de novo, using the methodology
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13526 - 2005-03-31
. Discussion We review orders granting summary judgment de novo, using the methodology
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13526 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
presents a question of law, which we review de novo. See State v. Booker, 2006 WI 79, ¶12, 292 Wis. 2d
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=64702 - 2014-09-15
presents a question of law, which we review de novo. See State v. Booker, 2006 WI 79, ¶12, 292 Wis. 2d
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=64702 - 2014-09-15
Agnes E. Maciolek v. City of Milwaukee Employes' Retirement System Annuity and Pension Board
for review. II ¶10 Statutory interpretation presents an issue of law which we review de novo. While
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=21184 - 2006-01-30
for review. II ¶10 Statutory interpretation presents an issue of law which we review de novo. While
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=21184 - 2006-01-30
Trinity Lutheran Church v. Dorschner Excavating, Inc.
decide de novo, owing no deference to the trial court’s conclusions. Insurance Co. of N. Am. v. Cease
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=21570 - 2006-02-23
decide de novo, owing no deference to the trial court’s conclusions. Insurance Co. of N. Am. v. Cease
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=21570 - 2006-02-23
State v. Ronald G. Sorenson
The construction of a statute is a question of law which we review de novo. State v. Irish, 210 Wis. 2d 107, 110
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14713 - 2005-03-31
The construction of a statute is a question of law which we review de novo. State v. Irish, 210 Wis. 2d 107, 110
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14713 - 2005-03-31
Steven G. Butzlaff v. State of Wisconsin Department of Health and Family Services
and consider the issues de novo. Green Spring Farms v. Kersten, 136 Wis.2d 304, 315-16, 401 N.W.2d 816, 820-21
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13640 - 2005-03-31
and consider the issues de novo. Green Spring Farms v. Kersten, 136 Wis.2d 304, 315-16, 401 N.W.2d 816, 820-21
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13640 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
de novo. Id. ¶12 The Estate claims the circuit court erred in instructing the jury to presume
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=39397 - 2009-08-12
de novo. Id. ¶12 The Estate claims the circuit court erred in instructing the jury to presume
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=39397 - 2009-08-12