Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 2251 - 2260 of 29817 for des.
Search results 2251 - 2260 of 29817 for des.
[PDF]
WI APP 215
the marital estate to work a de facto splitting of those assets where there is no hardship. Jeffrey further
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=26454 - 2014-09-15
the marital estate to work a de facto splitting of those assets where there is no hardship. Jeffrey further
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=26454 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
. VAN DE HEY, Judge. Affirmed. Before Kloppenburg, P.J., Blanchard, and Nashold, JJ. Per
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=720184 - 2023-10-26
. VAN DE HEY, Judge. Affirmed. Before Kloppenburg, P.J., Blanchard, and Nashold, JJ. Per
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=720184 - 2023-10-26
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
constitute reasonable suspicion is a question of law we review de novo. Id. ¶9 “The Fourth Amendment
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=209161 - 2018-03-06
constitute reasonable suspicion is a question of law we review de novo. Id. ¶9 “The Fourth Amendment
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=209161 - 2018-03-06
2008 WI APP 49
. As also explained below, we disagree. II. ¶9 We review de novo a circuit court’s grant of summary
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=31848 - 2008-03-18
. As also explained below, we disagree. II. ¶9 We review de novo a circuit court’s grant of summary
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=31848 - 2008-03-18
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
, or no deference (de novo review) to an agency’s legal conclusions. McRae, 320 Wis. 2d 178, ¶5. ¶8 Our supreme
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=100148 - 2017-09-21
, or no deference (de novo review) to an agency’s legal conclusions. McRae, 320 Wis. 2d 178, ¶5. ¶8 Our supreme
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=100148 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
in improper and unlawful conduct in creating a de facto sobriety checkpoint.” We reject Teniente’s
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=107419 - 2017-09-21
in improper and unlawful conduct in creating a de facto sobriety checkpoint.” We reject Teniente’s
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=107419 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
Ronald W. Morters v. Aiken & Scoptur
of the trial court’s grant of summary judgment is de novo, and we apply the same standards as did the trial
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=6535 - 2017-09-19
of the trial court’s grant of summary judgment is de novo, and we apply the same standards as did the trial
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=6535 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
of law for de novo review. Id. A. Circuit Court’s Factual Finding That NDC Rejected The $90,500
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=156433 - 2017-09-21
of law for de novo review. Id. A. Circuit Court’s Factual Finding That NDC Rejected The $90,500
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=156433 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
NOTICE
to the facts, however, is a question of law for our de novo review. Id. ¶6 As an initial matter
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=44953 - 2014-09-15
to the facts, however, is a question of law for our de novo review. Id. ¶6 As an initial matter
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=44953 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
State v. Michael Slinker
present questions of law that we review de novo. Id., ¶18. ¶6 A presumption of vindictiveness arises
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=6679 - 2017-09-20
present questions of law that we review de novo. Id., ¶18. ¶6 A presumption of vindictiveness arises
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=6679 - 2017-09-20