Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 18561 - 18570 of 29823 for des.
Search results 18561 - 18570 of 29823 for des.
COURT OF APPEALS
Plaintiff, v. G-Skaat, LLC, The De Pere Grand, LLC, Chad M. Schampers, Casey L. Ladowski, Frank R
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=75402 - 2011-12-19
Plaintiff, v. G-Skaat, LLC, The De Pere Grand, LLC, Chad M. Schampers, Casey L. Ladowski, Frank R
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=75402 - 2011-12-19
Carole F. Edland v. Wisconsin Physicians Service Insurance Corporation
interprets a statute under a de novo standard, without deference to the decision of the court of appeals
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=17130 - 2005-03-31
interprets a statute under a de novo standard, without deference to the decision of the court of appeals
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=17130 - 2005-03-31
Acuity Mutual Insurance Company v. Miguel A. Olivas
de novo. See Wolfe v. Wolfe, 2000 WI App 93, ¶14, 234 Wis. 2d 449, 610 N.W.2d 222 (which party bears
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=21163 - 2006-03-22
de novo. See Wolfe v. Wolfe, 2000 WI App 93, ¶14, 234 Wis. 2d 449, 610 N.W.2d 222 (which party bears
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=21163 - 2006-03-22
08AP2906 City of Mequon v. Gleen H. Sievers.doc
a question of constitutional fact, subject to de novo review.” State v. Sisk, 2001 WI App 182, ¶7, 247 Wis
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=36350 - 2009-05-05
a question of constitutional fact, subject to de novo review.” State v. Sisk, 2001 WI App 182, ¶7, 247 Wis
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=36350 - 2009-05-05
Vonnie D. Darby v. Jon Litscher
a question of law subject to our de novo review. State v. Setagord, 211 Wis. 2d 397, 405-06, 565 N.W.2d 506
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=5160 - 2005-03-31
a question of law subject to our de novo review. State v. Setagord, 211 Wis. 2d 397, 405-06, 565 N.W.2d 506
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=5160 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
. Whether the change is substantial is a question of law that this court reviews de novo. Id. However
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=65159 - 2011-05-31
. Whether the change is substantial is a question of law that this court reviews de novo. Id. However
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=65159 - 2011-05-31
COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND FILED March 20, 2007 A. John Voelker Acting Clerk of Court o...
.” State v. Franklin, 148 Wis. 2d 1, 9, 434 N.W.2d 609 (1989). We review de novo whether something
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=28484 - 2007-03-19
.” State v. Franklin, 148 Wis. 2d 1, 9, 434 N.W.2d 609 (1989). We review de novo whether something
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=28484 - 2007-03-19
John Ranes v. American Family Mutual Insurance Company
questions of law that we review de novo. Smith v. Atlantic Mut. Ins. Co., 155 Wis.2d 808, 810, 456 N.W.2d
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12088 - 2005-03-31
questions of law that we review de novo. Smith v. Atlantic Mut. Ins. Co., 155 Wis.2d 808, 810, 456 N.W.2d
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12088 - 2005-03-31
State v. Claus Bruestle
is a question of law that we review de novo. See State v. Baratka, 2002 WI App 288, ¶7, 258 Wis. 2d 342, 654
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=7455 - 2005-03-31
is a question of law that we review de novo. See State v. Baratka, 2002 WI App 288, ¶7, 258 Wis. 2d 342, 654
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=7455 - 2005-03-31
State v. Frank James Burt, Jr.
review de novo. See Craig S.G. v. State, 209 Wis. 2d 65, 68, 561 N.W.2d 807 (Ct. App. 1997
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15489 - 2005-03-31
review de novo. See Craig S.G. v. State, 209 Wis. 2d 65, 68, 561 N.W.2d 807 (Ct. App. 1997
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15489 - 2005-03-31