Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 16381 - 16390 of 29740 for des.
Search results 16381 - 16390 of 29740 for des.
Barbara B. v. Dorian H.
Barbara sought review in circuit court. There, the Honorable Barbara A. Kluka conducted a de novo review
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=16798 - 2005-03-31
Barbara sought review in circuit court. There, the Honorable Barbara A. Kluka conducted a de novo review
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=16798 - 2005-03-31
Kevin Thomas v. David H. Schwarz
parties likewise agreed that our review is de novo. At oral argument, however, the Respondents argued
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=25770 - 2006-08-06
parties likewise agreed that our review is de novo. At oral argument, however, the Respondents argued
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=25770 - 2006-08-06
2010 WI APP 125
‘used as a doctor’s office’ is a matter of statutory interpretation, which we review de novo.” St
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=53131 - 2011-08-21
‘used as a doctor’s office’ is a matter of statutory interpretation, which we review de novo.” St
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=53131 - 2011-08-21
Jaime R. Peterson v. Volkswagen of America, Inc.
this court reviews de novo. Wausau Tile, Inc., 226 Wis. 2d at 245. ¶3 This dispute concerns
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6359 - 2005-03-31
this court reviews de novo. Wausau Tile, Inc., 226 Wis. 2d at 245. ¶3 This dispute concerns
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6359 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
WI APP 144
. STAT. § 802.08(2) (2011-12).6 We review summary judgment de novo, using the same methodology
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=104321 - 2017-09-21
. STAT. § 802.08(2) (2011-12).6 We review summary judgment de novo, using the same methodology
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=104321 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
State v. Ronald G. Sorenson
requires an interpretation of Wis. Stat. ch. 980. We review statutory interpretation questions de novo
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=17449 - 2017-09-21
requires an interpretation of Wis. Stat. ch. 980. We review statutory interpretation questions de novo
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=17449 - 2017-09-21
State v. Xavier J. Rockette
that the impact of “non-disclosure of the police reports, while not meaningless, is de minimis upon the evidence
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=25320 - 2006-06-27
that the impact of “non-disclosure of the police reports, while not meaningless, is de minimis upon the evidence
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=25320 - 2006-06-27
[PDF]
State v. Jamie L. Pennington
; however, whether a person is “in custody” for Miranda purposes is a question of law we review de novo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=5782 - 2017-09-19
; however, whether a person is “in custody” for Miranda purposes is a question of law we review de novo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=5782 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
Frontsheet
is unconstitutional is a question of law that we review de novo. E.g., State v. Wood, 2010 WI 17, ¶15, 323 Wis
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=529131 - 2022-07-19
is unconstitutional is a question of law that we review de novo. E.g., State v. Wood, 2010 WI 17, ¶15, 323 Wis
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=529131 - 2022-07-19
Gary Richards v. First Union Securities, Inc.
, and therefore are questions of law which an appellate court reviews de novo. Useni v. Boudron, 2003 WI App 98
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=25324 - 2006-05-30
, and therefore are questions of law which an appellate court reviews de novo. Useni v. Boudron, 2003 WI App 98
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=25324 - 2006-05-30