Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 18101 - 18110 of 30143 for de.
Search results 18101 - 18110 of 30143 for de.
COURT OF APPEALS
that this court reviews de novo. See Prent Corp. v. Martek Holdings, Inc., 2000 WI App 194, ¶9, 238 Wis. 2d 777
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=86700 - 2012-09-04
that this court reviews de novo. See Prent Corp. v. Martek Holdings, Inc., 2000 WI App 194, ¶9, 238 Wis. 2d 777
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=86700 - 2012-09-04
[PDF]
State v. Marshall R. Reese
value when it was destroyed was de minimis at best. Although, as we have seen, Reese contended
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=20870 - 2017-09-21
value when it was destroyed was de minimis at best. Although, as we have seen, Reese contended
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=20870 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
State v. Christopher L.
)(a). Construction of a statute presents a question of law which we review de novo. See R.W.S. v. State, 156 Wis
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13015 - 2017-09-21
)(a). Construction of a statute presents a question of law which we review de novo. See R.W.S. v. State, 156 Wis
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13015 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
NOTICE
are multiplicitous is a question of law that we review de novo. State v. Lechner, 217 Wis. 2d 392, 401, 576 N.W.2d
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=31303 - 2014-09-15
are multiplicitous is a question of law that we review de novo. State v. Lechner, 217 Wis. 2d 392, 401, 576 N.W.2d
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=31303 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
NOTICE
cause, we uphold the findings of fact unless they are clearly erroneous and review de novo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=35613 - 2014-09-15
cause, we uphold the findings of fact unless they are clearly erroneous and review de novo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=35613 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
interpretation, a question of law we review de novo. Pufahl v. Williams, 179 Wis. 2d 104, 107, 506 N.W.2d 747
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=204998 - 2017-12-13
interpretation, a question of law we review de novo. Pufahl v. Williams, 179 Wis. 2d 104, 107, 506 N.W.2d 747
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=204998 - 2017-12-13
[PDF]
State v. Clinton L. Duhm
that we decide de novo without deference to the circuit court’s decision. State v. Fields, 2000 WI App
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=6098 - 2017-09-19
that we decide de novo without deference to the circuit court’s decision. State v. Fields, 2000 WI App
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=6098 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
County of Green Lake v. Clinton L. Duhm
that we decide de novo without deference to the circuit court’s decision. State v. Fields, 2000 WI App
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=6056 - 2017-09-19
that we decide de novo without deference to the circuit court’s decision. State v. Fields, 2000 WI App
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=6056 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
Kathy Delamater v. Search Beyond Adventures, Inc.
, 434, 546 N.W.2d 553 (Ct. App. 1996). We review a grant or denial of summary judgment de novo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=16221 - 2017-09-21
, 434, 546 N.W.2d 553 (Ct. App. 1996). We review a grant or denial of summary judgment de novo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=16221 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
Polk-Burnett Electric Cooperative v. Gary A. Pavlicek
. Discussion ¶8 We review summary judgment decisions de novo, applying the same methodology as the circuit
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=5490 - 2017-09-19
. Discussion ¶8 We review summary judgment decisions de novo, applying the same methodology as the circuit
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=5490 - 2017-09-19