Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 15981 - 15990 of 30134 for consulta de causas.

2009 WI APP 91
of statutory interpretation and the constitutionality of a statute. We review both questions de novo. See
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=36492 - 2009-06-29

State v. Peter D. Grefsheim
., and are subject to our de novo review. See Hughes v. Chrysler Motors Corp., 197 Wis.2d 973, 979, 543 N.W.2d 148
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14954 - 2005-03-31

[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

[PDF] State v. Daniel Marcellus Johnson
of facts constitutes a new factor is a question of law which we decide de novo. See id. at 97, 441 N.W
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=11940 - 2017-09-21

COURT OF APPEALS
there was ineffective assistance of counsel is a question of law that this court reviews de novo. See State v
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=100715 - 2013-08-12

State v. Paul E. Magnuson
construction, and we review the trial court’s decision de novo. State v. Gavigan, 122 Wis.2d 389, 391, 362 N.W
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13904 - 2005-03-31

[PDF] COURT OF APPEALS
facts, is a question of law we review de novo. Washburn Cnty. v. Smith, 2008 WI 23, ¶16, 308 Wis
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=133579 - 2017-09-21

[PDF] CA Blank Order
a question of law that we review de novo. See State v. Tolefree, 209 Wis. 2d 421, 424, 563 N.W.2d 175 (Ct
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=191650 - 2017-09-21

[PDF] NOTICE
on a question of law, our review is de novo.” Id. Here, the declaratory relief sought requires interpreting
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=35458 - 2014-09-15

[PDF] State v. Douglas D.
is not bound by the trial court’s conclusions of law and must decide the matter de novo. See In re Smith
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15718 - 2017-09-21