Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 16131 - 16140 of 30081 for de.
Search results 16131 - 16140 of 30081 for de.
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
have been violated is a question of law that we review de novo. See State v. Steinhardt, 2017 WI
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=244703 - 2019-08-06
have been violated is a question of law that we review de novo. See State v. Steinhardt, 2017 WI
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=244703 - 2019-08-06
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
to support the jury’s guilty verdicts for three crimes. We review the sufficiency of the evidence de novo
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=350844 - 2021-03-31
to support the jury’s guilty verdicts for three crimes. We review the sufficiency of the evidence de novo
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=350844 - 2021-03-31
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
of law we review de novo. Id. at 127-28. ¶7 Whether a plea was knowingly, voluntarily
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=89384 - 2014-09-15
of law we review de novo. Id. at 127-28. ¶7 Whether a plea was knowingly, voluntarily
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=89384 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
State v. Todd D. Duerst
). Both of these inquiries present questions of law, which an appellate court reviews de novo. Id
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=7467 - 2017-09-20
). Both of these inquiries present questions of law, which an appellate court reviews de novo. Id
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=7467 - 2017-09-20
[PDF]
WI APP 17
a question of law that we review de novo. See Wilke v. City of Appleton, 197 Wis. 2d 717, 726, 541 N.W.2d
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=34744 - 2014-09-15
a question of law that we review de novo. See Wilke v. City of Appleton, 197 Wis. 2d 717, 726, 541 N.W.2d
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=34744 - 2014-09-15
State v. Demetrius N.O.
which this court reviews de novo. See Brandt v. LIRC, 160 Wis.2d 353, 361, 466 N.W.2d 673, 676 (Ct. App
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=11908 - 2005-03-31
which this court reviews de novo. See Brandt v. LIRC, 160 Wis.2d 353, 361, 466 N.W.2d 673, 676 (Ct. App
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=11908 - 2005-03-31
Micah Oriedo v. Wisconsin Personnel Commission
of a statute may be accorded great weight deference, due weight deference or de novo review, depending
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4059 - 2005-03-31
of a statute may be accorded great weight deference, due weight deference or de novo review, depending
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4059 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
be accorded great weight deference, due weight deference, or we may review de novo, depending
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=115918 - 2005-03-31
be accorded great weight deference, due weight deference, or we may review de novo, depending
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=115918 - 2005-03-31
Froedtert Memorial Lutheran Hospital, Inc. v. Jerome B. Mueller
. A. Summary judgment. Our standard of review for summary judgment questions is de novo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9105 - 2005-03-31
. A. Summary judgment. Our standard of review for summary judgment questions is de novo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9105 - 2005-03-31
State v. Roland A. Smart
in smaller counties were allowed to seek de novo review. Id. at ¶6. The supreme court determined
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4996 - 2011-07-31
in smaller counties were allowed to seek de novo review. Id. at ¶6. The supreme court determined
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4996 - 2011-07-31