Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 22131 - 22140 of 29823 for des.
Search results 22131 - 22140 of 29823 for des.
[PDF]
State v. Charles E. Jackson
intent de novo because although it was also the trial judge, the trial took place approximately twelve
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=6900 - 2017-09-20
intent de novo because although it was also the trial judge, the trial took place approximately twelve
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=6900 - 2017-09-20
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
, which we review de novo. See Jenkins, 303 Wis. 2d 157, ¶34. No. 2011AP2543-CR 7
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=96281 - 2014-09-15
, which we review de novo. See Jenkins, 303 Wis. 2d 157, ¶34. No. 2011AP2543-CR 7
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=96281 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
Mitchell Bank v. Thomas G. Schanke
unless clearly erroneous. WIS. STAT. § 805.17(2) (1999-2000). We review questions of law de novo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=4072 - 2017-09-20
unless clearly erroneous. WIS. STAT. § 805.17(2) (1999-2000). We review questions of law de novo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=4072 - 2017-09-20
[PDF]
WI APP 41
the same methodology as the trial court, we review its decision de novo. Green Spring Farms v. Kersten
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=60051 - 2014-09-15
the same methodology as the trial court, we review its decision de novo. Green Spring Farms v. Kersten
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=60051 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
contempt. This issue presents a question of law that we review de novo. See Frisch v. Henrichs, 2007
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=216466 - 2018-07-31
contempt. This issue presents a question of law that we review de novo. See Frisch v. Henrichs, 2007
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=216466 - 2018-07-31
[PDF]
Stupar River LLC v. Town of Linwood Board of Review
an arm’s-length transaction. Because we review the Board’s assessment decision de novo, we need
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=17803 - 2017-09-21
an arm’s-length transaction. Because we review the Board’s assessment decision de novo, we need
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=17803 - 2017-09-21
COURT OF APPEALS
improperly granted summary judgment in favor of Holter. We review summary judgment decisions de novo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=60365 - 2011-02-23
improperly granted summary judgment in favor of Holter. We review summary judgment decisions de novo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=60365 - 2011-02-23
COURT OF APPEALS
the circuit court’s factual findings unless clearly erroneous but reviewing de novo whether those facts
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=50188 - 2010-05-24
the circuit court’s factual findings unless clearly erroneous but reviewing de novo whether those facts
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=50188 - 2010-05-24
Robert Kreckel v. Pieper Electric, Inc.
)(b) (2003-04).[2] ¶8 We review summary judgment de novo, applying the same
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=25931 - 2006-08-29
)(b) (2003-04).[2] ¶8 We review summary judgment de novo, applying the same
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=25931 - 2006-08-29
Timothy Cepukenas v. Shelli L. Cepukenas
of law which we review de novo. See Ball v. District No. 4, Area Bd., 117 Wis.2d 529, 537, 345 N.W.2d
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12662 - 2005-03-31
of law which we review de novo. See Ball v. District No. 4, Area Bd., 117 Wis.2d 529, 537, 345 N.W.2d
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12662 - 2005-03-31