Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 17171 - 17180 of 30154 for consulta de causas.
Search results 17171 - 17180 of 30154 for consulta de causas.
Mary C. Volker v. Oliver A. Pentinmaki, Jr.
of the attorney appearing in the case. Any technical violation of that provision is de minimis, and does
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=8372 - 2005-03-31
of the attorney appearing in the case. Any technical violation of that provision is de minimis, and does
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=8372 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
assistance was ineffective is a question of law we review de novo. Id. 1. Counsel’s Actions in Relation
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=238603 - 2019-04-04
assistance was ineffective is a question of law we review de novo. Id. 1. Counsel’s Actions in Relation
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=238603 - 2019-04-04
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
of facts, a justiciable controversy exists is a question of law that we review de novo. See Olson v
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=546719 - 2022-08-01
of facts, a justiciable controversy exists is a question of law that we review de novo. See Olson v
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=546719 - 2022-08-01
[PDF]
State v. Karleen K. Raasch
a question of statutory interpretation, which we review de novo. Patients Comp. Fund v. Lutheran Hosp
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13679 - 2017-09-21
a question of statutory interpretation, which we review de novo. Patients Comp. Fund v. Lutheran Hosp
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13679 - 2017-09-21
COURT OF APPEALS
review a trial court’s grant or denial of summary judgment de novo, applying the same methodology
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=80524 - 2012-04-10
review a trial court’s grant or denial of summary judgment de novo, applying the same methodology
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=80524 - 2012-04-10
State v. April O.
, the cause was submitted on the briefs of Thomas J. Walsh of Walsh & Walsh, S.C., De Pere. COURT
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=16019 - 2005-03-31
, the cause was submitted on the briefs of Thomas J. Walsh of Walsh & Walsh, S.C., De Pere. COURT
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=16019 - 2005-03-31
09AP5 State v. Jill Y. Treleven.doc
: linda m. van De Water, Judge. Affirmed. ¶1 ANDERSON, P.J.[1] Jill Y. Treleven contends
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=36906 - 2009-06-30
: linda m. van De Water, Judge. Affirmed. ¶1 ANDERSON, P.J.[1] Jill Y. Treleven contends
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=36906 - 2009-06-30
COURT OF APPEALS
,’ and the application of these historical facts to constitutional principles, which we review de novo.” Id. (citation
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=56839 - 2010-11-22
,’ and the application of these historical facts to constitutional principles, which we review de novo.” Id. (citation
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=56839 - 2010-11-22
[PDF]
WI App 4
de novo whether there was a sufficient factual basis. See State v. Peralta, 2011 WI App 81, ¶16
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=456959 - 2022-02-10
de novo whether there was a sufficient factual basis. See State v. Peralta, 2011 WI App 81, ¶16
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=456959 - 2022-02-10
City of Milwaukee v. Allos, Inc.
. The constitutionality of a statute is a question of law that this court reviews de novo. State v. McKenzie, 151 Wis.2d
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13285 - 2005-03-31
. The constitutionality of a statute is a question of law that this court reviews de novo. State v. McKenzie, 151 Wis.2d
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13285 - 2005-03-31