Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 20621 - 20630 of 29832 for des.
Search results 20621 - 20630 of 29832 for des.
[PDF]
Thomas G. Nejedlo v. School District of Wausaukee
court and our review is de novo. 3 See Green Spring Farms v. Kersten, 136 Wis. 2d 304, 315, 401 N.W
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=18378 - 2017-09-21
court and our review is de novo. 3 See Green Spring Farms v. Kersten, 136 Wis. 2d 304, 315, 401 N.W
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=18378 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
State v. Leslie M. Pirk
constitutes a new factor is a question of law we review de novo. Id. A new factor is "a fact or set
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=8222 - 2017-09-19
constitutes a new factor is a question of law we review de novo. Id. A new factor is "a fact or set
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=8222 - 2017-09-19
COURT OF APPEALS
judgments is de novo; we apply the same methodology as the trial court and consider the legal issues
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=80533 - 2012-04-10
judgments is de novo; we apply the same methodology as the trial court and consider the legal issues
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=80533 - 2012-04-10
COURT OF APPEALS
review de novo. State v. Johnson, 153 Wis. 2d 121, 128, 449 N.W.2d 845 (1990). ¶20 Rodthong argued
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=134242 - 2015-02-02
review de novo. State v. Johnson, 153 Wis. 2d 121, 128, 449 N.W.2d 845 (1990). ¶20 Rodthong argued
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=134242 - 2015-02-02
Margaret Barber v. Carole Barber Stoviak
is a question of law that we review de novo. See Rosplock v. Rosplock, 217 Wis. 2d 22, 32-33, 577 N.W.2d 32 (Ct
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=3937 - 2005-03-31
is a question of law that we review de novo. See Rosplock v. Rosplock, 217 Wis. 2d 22, 32-33, 577 N.W.2d 32 (Ct
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=3937 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
is a constitutional issue that an appellate court reviews de novo.”2 Id. ¶11 A defendant seeking resentencing
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=607774 - 2023-01-05
is a constitutional issue that an appellate court reviews de novo.”2 Id. ¶11 A defendant seeking resentencing
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=607774 - 2023-01-05
COURT OF APPEALS
could secure summer employment, the income would be de minimus. We conclude that the trial court’s
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=31459 - 2008-01-14
could secure summer employment, the income would be de minimus. We conclude that the trial court’s
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=31459 - 2008-01-14
COURT OF APPEALS
information presents a constitutional issue that this court reviews de novo. Id., ¶9. ¶9 Based upon
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=34641 - 2008-11-18
information presents a constitutional issue that this court reviews de novo. Id., ¶9. ¶9 Based upon
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=34641 - 2008-11-18
COURT OF APPEALS
determine de novo whether the agency acted within its jurisdiction, acted according to law, issued
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=132602 - 2015-01-07
determine de novo whether the agency acted within its jurisdiction, acted according to law, issued
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=132602 - 2015-01-07
State v. Rolando M. Tong
determination is not de novo; rather, we pay “great deference” to the magistrate’s decision. Illinois v. Gates
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12964 - 2005-03-31
determination is not de novo; rather, we pay “great deference” to the magistrate’s decision. Illinois v. Gates
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12964 - 2005-03-31