Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 18031 - 18040 of 30154 for de.
Search results 18031 - 18040 of 30154 for de.
Thomas J. Otto v. Milwaukee County
granting summary judgment. Id. Our review is de novo. Id. ¶18 Otto’s complaint asserting
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4213 - 2005-03-31
granting summary judgment. Id. Our review is de novo. Id. ¶18 Otto’s complaint asserting
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4213 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
NOTICE
review summary judgments de novo, using the same methodology as the circuit court. Green Spring Farms
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=26614 - 2014-09-15
review summary judgments de novo, using the same methodology as the circuit court. Green Spring Farms
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=26614 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
a defendant was denied that right is a constitutional issue that is reviewed de novo. Id. ¶9 To prevail
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=613734 - 2023-01-24
a defendant was denied that right is a constitutional issue that is reviewed de novo. Id. ¶9 To prevail
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=613734 - 2023-01-24
State v. Clinton L. Duhm
is a question of law that we decide de novo without deference to the circuit court’s decision. State v. Fields
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6098 - 2005-03-31
is a question of law that we decide de novo without deference to the circuit court’s decision. State v. Fields
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6098 - 2005-03-31
State v. Norman J.
. ¶7 We review de novo whether the trial court has applied the correct legal standard
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=5167 - 2005-03-31
. ¶7 We review de novo whether the trial court has applied the correct legal standard
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=5167 - 2005-03-31
State v. James A. Fischer
decide de novo. See State v. Waldner, 206 Wis.2d 51, 54, 556 N.W.2d 681, 683 (1996
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14122 - 2005-03-31
decide de novo. See State v. Waldner, 206 Wis.2d 51, 54, 556 N.W.2d 681, 683 (1996
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14122 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
Christopher J. Keller v. James R. Kraft
is de novo. See Stephenson v. Universal Metrics, Inc., 2002 WI 30, ¶26, 251 Wis. 2d 171, 641 N.W.2d
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=5995 - 2017-09-19
is de novo. See Stephenson v. Universal Metrics, Inc., 2002 WI 30, ¶26, 251 Wis. 2d 171, 641 N.W.2d
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=5995 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
or historical fact unless clearly erroneous; however, we determine de novo whether or when a seizure occurred
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=75130 - 2014-09-15
or historical fact unless clearly erroneous; however, we determine de novo whether or when a seizure occurred
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=75130 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
Clark Wolff v. Grant County Board of Adjustment
Standard of Review. The interpretation of an insurance policy is a question of law which we decide de
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=14581 - 2017-09-21
Standard of Review. The interpretation of an insurance policy is a question of law which we decide de
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=14581 - 2017-09-21
State v. Michael L. Kearney
of constitutional fact which we review de novo. See State v. Heft, 185 Wis.2d 288, 296, 517 N.W.2d 494, 498 (1994
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15010 - 2005-03-31
of constitutional fact which we review de novo. See State v. Heft, 185 Wis.2d 288, 296, 517 N.W.2d 494, 498 (1994
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15010 - 2005-03-31