Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 17491 - 17500 of 29823 for des.
Search results 17491 - 17500 of 29823 for des.
Debra M. Wikel v. State of Wisconsin Department of Transportation
] reviews de novo. For purposes of review, we must accept the facts stated in the complaint, along with all
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=3322 - 2005-03-31
] reviews de novo. For purposes of review, we must accept the facts stated in the complaint, along with all
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=3322 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
of constitutional fact that we review de novo. Brown, 276 Wis. 2d 559, ¶5. ¶8 We begin our discussion
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=36099 - 2009-04-07
of constitutional fact that we review de novo. Brown, 276 Wis. 2d 559, ¶5. ¶8 We begin our discussion
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=36099 - 2009-04-07
Frontsheet
of fact unless they are clearly erroneous. We review conclusions of law de novo. In re Disciplinary
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=42388 - 2009-10-19
of fact unless they are clearly erroneous. We review conclusions of law de novo. In re Disciplinary
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=42388 - 2009-10-19
The Estate of Mildred Furgason and the Estate of John Furgason v.
one of three levels of deference—great weight, due weight, or de novo. See UFE Inc. v. LIRC, 201 Wis
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=11503 - 2005-03-31
one of three levels of deference—great weight, due weight, or de novo. See UFE Inc. v. LIRC, 201 Wis
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=11503 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
of this issue presents a question of law that we review de novo. See State v. Church, 2003 WI 74, ¶17, 262 Wis
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=33344 - 2008-07-15
of this issue presents a question of law that we review de novo. See State v. Church, 2003 WI 74, ¶17, 262 Wis
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=33344 - 2008-07-15
COURT OF APPEALS
pursuant to Wis. Stat. Rule 809.25 (2007-08).[2] ¶2 This court reviews summary judgment decisions de
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=41950 - 2009-10-07
pursuant to Wis. Stat. Rule 809.25 (2007-08).[2] ¶2 This court reviews summary judgment decisions de
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=41950 - 2009-10-07
COURT OF APPEALS
¶15 We review a denial of summary judgment de novo, applying the same well-established
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=115737 - 2014-06-30
¶15 We review a denial of summary judgment de novo, applying the same well-established
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=115737 - 2014-06-30
Frontsheet
a referee's findings of fact unless they are clearly erroneous; conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. See
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=104581 - 2013-11-19
a referee's findings of fact unless they are clearly erroneous; conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. See
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=104581 - 2013-11-19
COURT OF APPEALS
review de novo. [State v.] Bentley, 201 Wis. 2d [303,] 309-10[, 548 N.W.2d 50 (1996)]. If the motion
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=43579 - 2009-11-16
review de novo. [State v.] Bentley, 201 Wis. 2d [303,] 309-10[, 548 N.W.2d 50 (1996)]. If the motion
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=43579 - 2009-11-16
COURT OF APPEALS
of law subject to de novo review by this court. Id. ¶5 In Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 22 (1968
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=31601 - 2008-01-22
of law subject to de novo review by this court. Id. ¶5 In Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 22 (1968
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=31601 - 2008-01-22