Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 15871 - 15880 of 30134 for consulta de causas.

[PDF] COURT OF APPEALS
is a question of statutory construction we review de novo. See City of La Crosse v. Richling, 178 Wis. 2d 856
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=79419 - 2014-09-15

Daniel R. Taylor v. Susan M. Taylor
de novo. Rosplock v. Rosplock, 217 Wis. 2d 22, 30, 577 N.W.2d 32 (Ct. App. 1998). When the terms
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4827 - 2005-03-31

Susan A. Riemer v. Universal Underwriters Insurance Company
judgment is also de novo, and we apply the same standards and methods as the trial court. Green Spring
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4886 - 2005-03-31

COURT OF APPEALS
review the trial court’s application of law to undisputed facts de novo. Theuer v. Labor & Indus. Review
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=38154 - 2009-07-22

State v. Isaac J.R.
, 434 N.W.2d 773, 778 (1989). However, despite our de novo standard of review, we benefit from
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12571 - 2005-03-31

State v. Carson Darnell Combs
of statutory interpretation, which we decide de novo. See Truttschel v. Martin, 208 Wis. 2d 361, 364-65, 560
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=18890 - 2005-07-06

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=6205 - 2005-03-31

COURT OF APPEALS
are questions of law that we review de novo. See id. at 634. ¶6 When a defendant pursues postconviction
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=127185 - 2014-11-11

State v. Jesse Ruiz
review de novo. Bentley, 201 Wis. 2d at 309-10. If the motion raises such facts, the [trial] court must
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=25413 - 2006-06-05

State v. Tommy Lo
we review de novo. Id. Lo argues first that the condition that he “have
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14435 - 2005-03-31