Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 15381 - 15390 of 29740 for des.
Search results 15381 - 15390 of 29740 for des.
Welding Shop, Ltd. v. Silent Stalker, Inc.
review summary judgment decisions de novo, using the methodology set out in § 802.08(2), Stats. See M&I
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14675 - 2005-03-31
review summary judgment decisions de novo, using the methodology set out in § 802.08(2), Stats. See M&I
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14675 - 2005-03-31
Village of Trempealeau v. Mike R. Mikrut
lost competency to proceed presents a question of law that we review de novo without deference
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6217 - 2005-03-31
lost competency to proceed presents a question of law that we review de novo without deference
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6217 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
was deficient and whether the deficiency prejudiced the defense are questions of law that we review de novo. Id
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=33046 - 2008-06-16
was deficient and whether the deficiency prejudiced the defense are questions of law that we review de novo. Id
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=33046 - 2008-06-16
State v. Ricardo Martinez
right to a fair trial and raises a question of law that we review de novo. Id. ¶7 The threshold
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=7401 - 2005-03-31
right to a fair trial and raises a question of law that we review de novo. Id. ¶7 The threshold
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=7401 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
State v. David Ameen
, 555 N.W.2d 651, 654 (Ct. App. 1996). However, we value a trial court’s decision in spite of our de
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13810 - 2014-09-15
, 555 N.W.2d 651, 654 (Ct. App. 1996). However, we value a trial court’s decision in spite of our de
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13810 - 2014-09-15
Timothy J. Lipke v. Tri-County Area School Board
). This is a question that we decide de novo, without deference to the trial court’s determination. See id
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12318 - 2005-03-31
). This is a question that we decide de novo, without deference to the trial court’s determination. See id
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12318 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
to those facts is reviewed de novo. See State v. Blatterman, 2015 WI 46, ¶26 n.9, 362 Wis. 2d 138, 864
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=176618 - 2017-09-21
to those facts is reviewed de novo. See State v. Blatterman, 2015 WI 46, ¶26 n.9, 362 Wis. 2d 138, 864
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=176618 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
State v. Roland A. Smart
to seek de novo review. Id. at ¶6. The supreme court determined this distinction was without
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=4996 - 2017-09-19
to seek de novo review. Id. at ¶6. The supreme court determined this distinction was without
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=4996 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
claim. Discussion ¶9 We review a grant of summary judgment de novo, using the same methodology
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=175141 - 2017-09-21
claim. Discussion ¶9 We review a grant of summary judgment de novo, using the same methodology
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=175141 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
FICE OF THE CLERK
presents a question of law we review de novo. See State v. Ziebart, 2003 WI App 258, ¶26, 268 Wis. 2d
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=872275 - 2024-11-06
presents a question of law we review de novo. See State v. Ziebart, 2003 WI App 258, ¶26, 268 Wis. 2d
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=872275 - 2024-11-06