Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 22411 - 22420 of 29823 for des.

COURT OF APPEALS
review its legal conclusions de novo. See State ex rel. Geipel v. City of Milwaukee, 68 Wis. 2d 726, 731
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=40081 - 2009-08-26

2007 WI 7
are reviewed de novo. See In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against Carroll, 2001 WI 130, ¶29, 248 Wis. 2d 662
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=27845 - 2007-01-18

[PDF] Megal Development Corporation v. Craig Shadof
Statutory interpretation is an issue of law which we review de novo. While the review is de novo
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=20196 - 2017-09-21

[PDF] WI 4
on the pleadings. Whether a party is entitled to judgment on the pleadings is a question of law we review de novo
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=912027 - 2025-02-07

Frontsheet
presents a question of law that we review de novo. See Hughes, 197 Wis. 2d at 978-79 (interpreting
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=37890 - 2009-07-16

State v. Hayes Johnson
de novo. United States v. Contreras, 108 F.3d 1255, 1262 (10th Cir. 1997). However, we review
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=17259 - 2005-03-31

Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Michael G. Trewin
the referee's findings of fact unless clearly erroneous and it reviews conclusions of law de novo. The record
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=16700 - 2005-03-31

Town of Campbell v. City of La Crosse
are not disputed is a question of law, which we review de novo. State v. Setagord, 211 Wis. 2d 397, 405-06, 565
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=5708 - 2005-03-31

State v. Gary L. Gordon
reviews de novo. See County of Kenosha v. C & S Mgmt., Inc., 223 Wis. 2d 373, 395, 588 N.W.2d 236 (1999
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4104 - 2005-03-31

Mews Companies, Inc. v. City of Milwaukee
the well-known methodology that need not be repeated here, this court reviews de novo a trial court’s
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15218 - 2005-03-31