Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 16621 - 16630 of 29796 for des.
Search results 16621 - 16630 of 29796 for des.
City of Mequon v. Sarah J. Peacock
. Second, we review the determination of reasonable suspicion de novo. Id. ¶6 The temporary
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=5348 - 2005-03-31
. Second, we review the determination of reasonable suspicion de novo. Id. ¶6 The temporary
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=5348 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
NOTICE
fact, which we review de novo. State v. Coleman, 2002 WI App 100, ¶10, 253 Wis. 2d 693, 644 N.W.2d
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=36434 - 2014-09-15
fact, which we review de novo. State v. Coleman, 2002 WI App 100, ¶10, 253 Wis. 2d 693, 644 N.W.2d
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=36434 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
de novo No. 2024AP957 6 and without deference to the Commission’s decision. See
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=965316 - 2025-06-04
de novo No. 2024AP957 6 and without deference to the Commission’s decision. See
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=965316 - 2025-06-04
[PDF]
Village of Trempealeau v. Mike R. Mikrut
a circuit court has lost competency to proceed presents a question of law that we review de novo without
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=6204 - 2017-09-19
a circuit court has lost competency to proceed presents a question of law that we review de novo without
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=6204 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
was deficient and prejudicial to his or her client’s defense is a question of law that we review de novo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=249835 - 2019-11-12
was deficient and prejudicial to his or her client’s defense is a question of law that we review de novo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=249835 - 2019-11-12
State v. Jay Warren Downs
, it is a question of law that we review de novo. See State v. Brown, 215 Wis. 2d 716, 721, 573 N.W.2d 884, 886 (Ct
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14434 - 2005-03-31
, it is a question of law that we review de novo. See State v. Brown, 215 Wis. 2d 716, 721, 573 N.W.2d 884, 886 (Ct
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14434 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
, on the other hand, is a question of law, which we review de novo. Harnischfeger Corp. v. LIRC, 196 Wis. 2d 650
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=135731 - 2015-02-25
, on the other hand, is a question of law, which we review de novo. Harnischfeger Corp. v. LIRC, 196 Wis. 2d 650
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=135731 - 2015-02-25
State v. Aaron J. Grender
we review de novo. State v. Gammons, 2001 WI App 36, ¶6, 241 Wis. 2d 296, 625 N.W.2d 623. ¶11
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=7524 - 2005-03-31
we review de novo. State v. Gammons, 2001 WI App 36, ¶6, 241 Wis. 2d 296, 625 N.W.2d 623. ¶11
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=7524 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
for summary judgment de novo, using the same methodology as the circuit court. Yahnke v. Carson, 2000 WI 74
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=97393 - 2013-05-28
for summary judgment de novo, using the same methodology as the circuit court. Yahnke v. Carson, 2000 WI 74
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=97393 - 2013-05-28
COURT OF APPEALS
things. Meis filed a motion for a de novo hearing, claiming “[t]he competency of the petitioner
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=35478 - 2009-02-19
things. Meis filed a motion for a de novo hearing, claiming “[t]he competency of the petitioner
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=35478 - 2009-02-19