Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 15761 - 15770 of 29823 for des.

COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND FILED November 14, 2006 Cornelia G. Clark Clerk of Court of ...
The grant of a motion for summary judgment is a matter of law that this court reviews de novo. Torgerson v
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=27093 - 2006-11-13

[PDF] NOTICE
the application of constitutional principles to the factual findings de novo. See Casarez, 314 Wis. 2d 661, ¶9
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=39222 - 2014-09-15

State v. Karshra C. Armstrong
de novo. See State v. Echols, 152 Wis.2d 725, 739, 449 N.W.2d 320, 325 (Ct. App. 1989
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10024 - 2005-03-31

[PDF] COURT OF APPEALS
(“Although this court engages in summary judgment review de novo, we nonetheless may apply waiver
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=94342 - 2014-09-15

[PDF] COURT OF APPEALS
. Whether the facts constitute a new factor is a question of law we review de novo. Ibid. ¶11 In State
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=82322 - 2014-09-15

State v. Terry V. Anderson
partnership agreement and not an investment contract. This issue presents a question of law that we review de
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9533 - 2005-03-31

State v. Joe J. Davis
is a question of law that we review de novo.” Id. at 310 (citations omitted). A circuit court may refuse
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=2256 - 2005-03-31

Town of Mount Pleasant v. Hartford Accident and Indemnity Company
.2d 142 (citations omitted). Summary judgment presents a question of law that we review de novo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=2287 - 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

[PDF] CA Blank Order
review de novo.” Salinas, 369 Wis. 2d 9, ¶30. We owe no deference to the trial court’s decision
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=640214 - 2023-04-04