Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 22591 - 22600 of 29823 for des.
Search results 22591 - 22600 of 29823 for des.
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
and then review de novo whether those facts met the standard of a valid deed. See WIS. STAT. § 805.17(2) (2021
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=717783 - 2023-10-24
and then review de novo whether those facts met the standard of a valid deed. See WIS. STAT. § 805.17(2) (2021
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=717783 - 2023-10-24
R. Scott McCormick v. Richard A. Schubring
are questions of law that we decide de novo. See State v. Byrge, 2000 WI 101, ¶32, 237 Wis. 2d 197, 614 N.W.2d
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=16617 - 2005-03-31
are questions of law that we decide de novo. See State v. Byrge, 2000 WI 101, ¶32, 237 Wis. 2d 197, 614 N.W.2d
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=16617 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
a question of law that this court reviews de novo. See State v. Tolefree, 209 Wis. 2d 421, 424, 563 N.W.2d
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=122726 - 2014-09-30
a question of law that this court reviews de novo. See State v. Tolefree, 209 Wis. 2d 421, 424, 563 N.W.2d
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=122726 - 2014-09-30
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
are subject to de novo review. Jackson Cty. v. Susan H., 2010 WI App 82, ¶10, 326 Wis. 2d 246, 785 N.W. 677
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=198730 - 2017-10-26
are subject to de novo review. Jackson Cty. v. Susan H., 2010 WI App 82, ¶10, 326 Wis. 2d 246, 785 N.W. 677
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=198730 - 2017-10-26
[PDF]
Charlie Tate, Jr. v. General Casualty Co. of Wisconsin
altogether. No. 99-3320 9 ¶18 In reviewing a grant of summary judgment, we employ a de novo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=16331 - 2017-09-21
altogether. No. 99-3320 9 ¶18 In reviewing a grant of summary judgment, we employ a de novo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=16331 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
denial of a defendant’s motion for a Franks hearing is subject to de novo review. See State v. Manuel
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=138237 - 2017-09-21
denial of a defendant’s motion for a Franks hearing is subject to de novo review. See State v. Manuel
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=138237 - 2017-09-21
State v. Keith Schroeder
)(e) is a question of law we review de novo. See State v. Deborah J.Z., 228 Wis. 2d 468, 472, 596 N.W
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15529 - 2005-03-31
)(e) is a question of law we review de novo. See State v. Deborah J.Z., 228 Wis. 2d 468, 472, 596 N.W
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15529 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
State v. Eduardo R.
this court reviews de novo. State v. Buck, 210 Wis. 2d 115, 124, 565 N.W.2d 168 (Ct. App. 1997); State v
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=2451 - 2017-09-19
this court reviews de novo. State v. Buck, 210 Wis. 2d 115, 124, 565 N.W.2d 168 (Ct. App. 1997); State v
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=2451 - 2017-09-19
State v. Jerrell I. Denson
. We review that conclusion de novo. See State v. Michels, 141 Wis. 2d 81, 87, 414 N.W.2d 311 (Ct. App
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15720 - 2005-03-31
. We review that conclusion de novo. See State v. Michels, 141 Wis. 2d 81, 87, 414 N.W.2d 311 (Ct. App
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15720 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
Robert G. Fish v. Margaret W. Fish
a question of law that we decide No. 94-2345 -3- de novo, without deference to the trial
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=8082 - 2017-09-19
a question of law that we decide No. 94-2345 -3- de novo, without deference to the trial
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=8082 - 2017-09-19