Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 24101 - 24110 of 29823 for des.
Search results 24101 - 24110 of 29823 for des.
[PDF]
State v. Justice C. Granger
violated is a constitutional fact that we determine de novo. See State v. Ross, 203 Wis.2d 66, 79, 552
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13477 - 2017-09-21
violated is a constitutional fact that we determine de novo. See State v. Ross, 203 Wis.2d 66, 79, 552
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13477 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
Wisconsin Bell, Inc. v. Sheffield Systems, Inc.
. App. 1993). Our review is de novo. See Smith v. Katz, 218 Wis.2d 442, 447-48, 578 N.W.2d 202, 204
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=12074 - 2017-09-21
. App. 1993). Our review is de novo. See Smith v. Katz, 218 Wis.2d 442, 447-48, 578 N.W.2d 202, 204
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=12074 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
that this court reviews de novo. State v. Ziegler, 2005 WI App 69, ¶10, 280 Wis. 2d 860, 695 N.W.2d 895
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=357596 - 2021-04-20
that this court reviews de novo. State v. Ziegler, 2005 WI App 69, ¶10, 280 Wis. 2d 860, 695 N.W.2d 895
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=357596 - 2021-04-20
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
not make a sufficient showing on one, see id. at 697, and this court decides de novo the legal issues
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=575407 - 2022-10-12
not make a sufficient showing on one, see id. at 697, and this court decides de novo the legal issues
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=575407 - 2022-10-12
2007 WI APP 142
of the defendant-appellant, the cause was submitted on the brief of Marcella De Peters, Milwaukee. Respondent
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=28883 - 2007-06-26
of the defendant-appellant, the cause was submitted on the brief of Marcella De Peters, Milwaukee. Respondent
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=28883 - 2007-06-26
COURT OF APPEALS
, 585 N.W.2d 640 (Ct. App. 1998). We apply these standards de novo to the Common Council’s decision
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=72904 - 2011-10-26
, 585 N.W.2d 640 (Ct. App. 1998). We apply these standards de novo to the Common Council’s decision
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=72904 - 2011-10-26
COURT OF APPEALS
of law for our de novo review. See State v. Harrell, 2008 WI App 37, ¶37, 308 Wis. 2d 166, 187, 747 N.W
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=97330 - 2013-05-28
of law for our de novo review. See State v. Harrell, 2008 WI App 37, ¶37, 308 Wis. 2d 166, 187, 747 N.W
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=97330 - 2013-05-28
Eugene B. Sherry v. Emile W. Salvo
, we apply the same methodology as the trial court,[3] and we consider the issues de novo. Green
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10577 - 2005-03-31
, we apply the same methodology as the trial court,[3] and we consider the issues de novo. Green
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10577 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
“acted according to law.” ¶8 Because our review of the Common Council’s decision is de novo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=70007 - 2014-09-15
“acted according to law.” ¶8 Because our review of the Common Council’s decision is de novo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=70007 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
, subject to our de novo review.” Smith, 342 Wis. 2d 710, ¶24. When conducting our review, “we consider
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=958882 - 2025-05-20
, subject to our de novo review.” Smith, 342 Wis. 2d 710, ¶24. When conducting our review, “we consider
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=958882 - 2025-05-20