Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 2401 - 2410 of 29821 for des.

[PDF] Jeffrey D. Berlin v. Lori S. Berlin
. However, whether the change is substantial is a question of law which we review de novo. But because
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=4627 - 2017-09-19

[PDF] NOTICE
consistent with constitutional requirements is a question of law that we review de novo. See id
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=55300 - 2014-09-15

State v. Timothy S. Kuklinski
, the order is affirmed. DISCUSSION Scope of Review. This court will determine de
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10777 - 2005-03-31

[PDF] COURT OF APPEALS
of such discretion turns upon a question of law, however, we review the question de novo. Id. Here, the issue
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=108494 - 2017-09-21

[PDF] The Lakefront Neighborhood Coalition v. City of Milwaukee
fact disputes. WIS. STAT. ยง 802.08(2). We review summary judgment proceedings de novo. Voss v
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=6656 - 2017-09-20

Beverly Drews v. Carol Marwede
, Respondent. APPEAL from an order of the circuit court for Outagamie County: JOHN A. DES
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=25891 - 2006-07-17

[PDF] State v. Todd J. Gerrits
-APPELLANT. APPEAL from a judgment of the circuit court for Outagamie County: JOHN A. DES
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15311 - 2017-09-21

Ruth H. Laho v. Century 21 Baltes-Selsberg
was improperly granted is a question of law which we review de novo. See generally Preloznik v. City of Madison
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9295 - 2005-03-31

COURT OF APPEALS
. Application of a statute to a set of facts presents a question of law subject to de novo review. See
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=143483 - 2015-06-29

[PDF] Casanova Retail Liquor Store, Inc. v. State
interpretation presents a question of law that we review de novo. State ex rel. Frederick v. McCaughtry, 173
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=9079 - 2017-09-19