Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 2011 - 2020 of 29810 for des.
Search results 2011 - 2020 of 29810 for des.
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
by Escalona presents a question of law that we review de novo. State v. Tolefree, 209 Wis. 2d 421, 424, 563
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=454132 - 2021-11-23
by Escalona presents a question of law that we review de novo. State v. Tolefree, 209 Wis. 2d 421, 424, 563
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=454132 - 2021-11-23
Roger L. Kaufman v. Jon E. Litscher
it was not timely filed is de novo. See State ex rel. Walker v. McCaughtry, 2001 WI App 110, ¶11, 244 Wis. 2d 177
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4357 - 2005-03-31
it was not timely filed is de novo. See State ex rel. Walker v. McCaughtry, 2001 WI App 110, ¶11, 244 Wis. 2d 177
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4357 - 2005-03-31
Sybil Drabek v. Floyd Rasmussen
that we review de novo. See Hunzinger Constr. Co. v. Granite Resources Corp., 196 Wis.2d 327, 332, 538
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12402 - 2005-03-31
that we review de novo. See Hunzinger Constr. Co. v. Granite Resources Corp., 196 Wis.2d 327, 332, 538
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12402 - 2005-03-31
City of Oshkosh v. Rose M. Forbes
expert testimony is required is a question of law to be reviewed de novo, no case law backs
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=8827 - 2005-03-31
expert testimony is required is a question of law to be reviewed de novo, no case law backs
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=8827 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
review de novo. Id., ¶9. “[I]f the motion does not raise facts sufficient to entitle the movant
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=294348 - 2020-10-07
review de novo. Id., ¶9. “[I]f the motion does not raise facts sufficient to entitle the movant
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=294348 - 2020-10-07
Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Kimberly A. Theobald
erroneous but conclusions of law are reviewed on a de novo basis. See In re Disciplinary Proceedings
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=16794 - 2005-03-31
erroneous but conclusions of law are reviewed on a de novo basis. See In re Disciplinary Proceedings
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=16794 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
motion. DISCUSSION ¶8 We review a grant of summary judgment de novo, applying the same standards
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=135469 - 2017-09-21
motion. DISCUSSION ¶8 We review a grant of summary judgment de novo, applying the same standards
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=135469 - 2017-09-21
Josephine Eckendorf v. Richard Austin
is a question of law and will be reviewed de novo. See Atkinson, 211 Wis. 2d at 638. ¶8 The Austins
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=2391 - 2005-03-31
is a question of law and will be reviewed de novo. See Atkinson, 211 Wis. 2d at 638. ¶8 The Austins
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=2391 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
NOTICE
is a question of law we review de novo. See, e.g., State v. Piddington, 2001 WI 24, ¶13, 241 Wis. 2d 754
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=32180 - 2014-09-15
is a question of law we review de novo. See, e.g., State v. Piddington, 2001 WI 24, ¶13, 241 Wis. 2d 754
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=32180 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
County of Fond du Lac v. Vincent W. English
findings of fact unless clearly erroneous and review de novo whether such facts satisfy constitutional
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=18696 - 2017-09-21
findings of fact unless clearly erroneous and review de novo whether such facts satisfy constitutional
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=18696 - 2017-09-21