Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 21511 - 21520 of 29827 for des.
Search results 21511 - 21520 of 29827 for des.
COURT OF APPEALS
solely at a question of law. We review questions of law de novo. United Rentals, Inc. v. City
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=63999 - 2011-05-11
solely at a question of law. We review questions of law de novo. United Rentals, Inc. v. City
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=63999 - 2011-05-11
2006 WI APP 228
by the child witness in the presence of the defendant is more than de minimis, i.e., more than ‘mere
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=26934 - 2006-11-20
by the child witness in the presence of the defendant is more than de minimis, i.e., more than ‘mere
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=26934 - 2006-11-20
Rainald Schurmann v. Guy Neau
. ¶6 We review summary judgment decisions de novo, applying the same standards employed
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=2233 - 2005-03-31
. ¶6 We review summary judgment decisions de novo, applying the same standards employed
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=2233 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
Towne Realty, Inc. v. Zurich Insurance Company
duty to defend is a question of law, we review both questions de novo without deference
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=16920 - 2017-09-21
duty to defend is a question of law, we review both questions de novo without deference
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=16920 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
WI APP 102
of a statute is a question of law we review de novo. State v. Polashek, 2002 WI 74, ¶17, 253 Wis. 2d 527
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=120491 - 2014-11-11
of a statute is a question of law we review de novo. State v. Polashek, 2002 WI 74, ¶17, 253 Wis. 2d 527
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=120491 - 2014-11-11
[PDF]
Hugh R. Mommsen v. Duane Schueller
we review de novo. See Minuteman, Inc. v. Alexander, 147 Wis.2d 842, 853, 434 N.W.2d 773, 778
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=14709 - 2017-09-21
we review de novo. See Minuteman, Inc. v. Alexander, 147 Wis.2d 842, 853, 434 N.W.2d 773, 778
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=14709 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
WI APP 77
. Statutory interpretation presents a question of law that this court reviews de novo. DOR v. River City
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=436240 - 2021-12-09
. Statutory interpretation presents a question of law that this court reviews de novo. DOR v. River City
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=436240 - 2021-12-09
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
the facts in question “satisfy the statutory standard is a question of law that we review de novo.” Id
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=587783 - 2022-11-08
the facts in question “satisfy the statutory standard is a question of law that we review de novo.” Id
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=587783 - 2022-11-08
James Antisdel v. City of Oak Creek Police and Fire Commission
of summary judgment is de novo. See Green Spring Farms v. Kersten, 136 Wis.2d 304, 315, 401 N.W.2d 816, 820
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13464 - 2005-03-31
of summary judgment is de novo. See Green Spring Farms v. Kersten, 136 Wis.2d 304, 315, 401 N.W.2d 816, 820
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13464 - 2005-03-31
Diane Haddican-Czestler v. Mitchell J. Barrock
review questions of law de novo. See State v. Ludwigson, 212 Wis.2d 871, 875, 569 N.W.2d 762, 764 (Ct
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13587 - 2005-03-31
review questions of law de novo. See State v. Ludwigson, 212 Wis.2d 871, 875, 569 N.W.2d 762, 764 (Ct
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13587 - 2005-03-31