Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 24561 - 24570 of 29823 for des.
Search results 24561 - 24570 of 29823 for des.
COURT OF APPEALS
was erroneously exercised is a question of law that this court reviews de novo, Anna S., 270 Wis. 2d 411, ¶7
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=69329 - 2015-03-11
was erroneously exercised is a question of law that this court reviews de novo, Anna S., 270 Wis. 2d 411, ¶7
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=69329 - 2015-03-11
[PDF]
Rock County v. Amy L.
of law that we review de novo. Id. at 236-37, 548 N.W.2d at 76. The required test is that counsel
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=14169 - 2014-09-15
of law that we review de novo. Id. at 236-37, 548 N.W.2d at 76. The required test is that counsel
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=14169 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
, whether these findings satisfy the statutory standards is a question of law that we review de novo. Id
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=452956 - 2021-11-12
, whether these findings satisfy the statutory standards is a question of law that we review de novo. Id
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=452956 - 2021-11-12
[PDF]
Mary Ann Jones v. The Estate of Robert G. Jones
a question of statutory interpretation and contract interpretation, which we review de novo, but benefiting
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=16495 - 2017-09-21
a question of statutory interpretation and contract interpretation, which we review de novo, but benefiting
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=16495 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
omitted). This presents a question of law that we review de novo. See State v. Allen, 2004 WI 106, ¶9
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=252535 - 2020-01-14
omitted). This presents a question of law that we review de novo. See State v. Allen, 2004 WI 106, ¶9
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=252535 - 2020-01-14
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
-gram weight discrepancy is de minimis and not enough to have rendered the cocaine inadmissible
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=98610 - 2014-09-15
-gram weight discrepancy is de minimis and not enough to have rendered the cocaine inadmissible
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=98610 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
Jerry J. Garceau v. Brenda S. Garceau
is marital property subject to division under § 767.255, STATS., is a question of law we review de novo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=14776 - 2017-09-21
is marital property subject to division under § 767.255, STATS., is a question of law we review de novo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=14776 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
Albert Trostel & Sons Company v. Employers Insurance of Wausau
is de novo. Park Bancorporation, Inc. v. Sletteland, 182 Wis.2d 131, 140, 513 N.W.2d 609, 613 (Ct
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=9145 - 2017-09-19
is de novo. Park Bancorporation, Inc. v. Sletteland, 182 Wis.2d 131, 140, 513 N.W.2d 609, 613 (Ct
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=9145 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
WI 54
as de minimis. ¶30 The legislature's choice of language in Wis. Stat. § 70.11(42)(a)2.a. further
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=375405 - 2021-06-08
as de minimis. ¶30 The legislature's choice of language in Wis. Stat. § 70.11(42)(a)2.a. further
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=375405 - 2021-06-08
[PDF]
WI APP 24
are undisputed, is a question of law; it is therefore a question we decide de novo. See Patrickus v
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=27899 - 2014-09-15
are undisputed, is a question of law; it is therefore a question we decide de novo. See Patrickus v
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=27899 - 2014-09-15