Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 17491 - 17500 of 29823 for des.

University of Wisconsin Hospitals and Clinics Authority v. Wisconsin Employment Relations Committee
deference or de novo review, depending on the circumstances. See UFE, Inc. v. LIRC, 201 Wis. 2d 274, 284
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=16146 - 2005-03-31

COURT OF APPEALS
court’s findings of historical and evidentiary facts unless they are clearly erroneous but we determine de
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=29860 - 2007-07-31

State v. James R. Brownson
its obligations; rather, Brownson contends that the State de facto withdrew from the agreement because
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13207 - 2005-03-31

[PDF] WI APP 51
the pleadings comported with the constitutional notice requirements is a question of law we review de novo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=94530 - 2014-09-15

[PDF] Larry C. Olson v. Charles H. Thompson
a question of law that we review de novo. Id. at 442, 468 N.W.2d at 23. We first examine
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=11517 - 2017-09-19

[PDF] H&H Assad, LLC v. City of Milwaukee
application. ¶5 On April 5, 2002, Assad returned to circuit court with a motion for a de novo hearing
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=6085 - 2017-09-19

State v. Mark Anthony Kelley
is a question of law that we review de novo.” Bentley, 201 Wis.2d at 310, 548 N.W.2d at 53
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12542 - 2005-03-31

State v. Todd R. Gilbertson
” is a question of law, which we review de novo. Michels, 150 Wis.2d at 97, 441 N.W.2d at 279
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10480 - 2005-03-31

[PDF] NOTICE
. We review this question de novo. Id. ¶16 Bosman contends his counsel was ineffective
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=32752 - 2014-09-15

COURT OF APPEALS
of law subject to de novo review would constitute forfeiture of the issue. See State v. Huebner, 2000 WI
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=107812 - 2014-02-10