Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 22251 - 22260 of 29823 for des.

[PDF] COURT OF APPEALS
is a question of law that we review de novo.” Id. ¶20 Here, for the reasons that follow, we conclude
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=980592 - 2025-07-10

Shane M. Heimerl v. Waverly Beach, Inc.
We review a trial court’s grant or denial of summary judgment de novo. Waters v. United States Fid
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6320 - 2005-03-31

Walworth County Department of Health & Human Services v. Patricia H.
of a statute presents a question of law that we review de novo. State v. Post, 197 Wis. 2d 279, 301, 541 N.W
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4623 - 2005-03-31

James Grafft v. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources
the statute de novo. See Capoun Revocable Trust v. Ansari, 2000 WI App 83, ¶6, 234 Wis. 2d 335, 610 N.W.2d
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=2103 - 2005-03-31

State v. Jeffery L. Watson
the State’s conduct breached the plea agreement is a question of law that we review de novo. State v. Wills
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13804 - 2005-03-31

Adela S. Hagen v. Labor and Industry Review Commission
interpretation is a question of law which a court generally reviews under a de novo standard. Stockbridge School
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=16899 - 2005-03-31

COURT OF APPEALS
it is a question of law which this court reviews de novo. State v. Willett, 2000 WI App 212, ¶4, 238 Wis. 2d 621
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=34444 - 2008-11-04

COURT OF APPEALS
court had authority to act is a question of law that we review de novo. Harvest Savings Bank v. ROI
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=29404 - 2007-06-18

State v. Ary L. Jones, Sr.
Jones’ double jeopardy protections have been violated is a question of law that we review de novo. Id
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4558 - 2012-06-11

COURT OF APPEALS
a question of statutory interpretation, we review Thornton’s challenge de novo. See id., ¶9. ¶7
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=62727 - 2005-03-31