Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 25111 - 25120 of 29739 for des.

[PDF] State v. Dennis H. Murphy
review de novo. Id. ¶8 There is no dispute here that trial counsel did not ask any witness about
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=6612 - 2017-09-19

[PDF] Frontsheet
of law on a de novo basis. In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against Inglimo, 2007 WI 126, ¶5, 305 Wis
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=258581 - 2020-04-22

Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Arik J. Guenther
of fact are affirmed unless clearly erroneous; but conclusions of law are reviewed on a de novo basis
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=19060 - 2005-07-18

[PDF] COURT OF APPEALS
a judgment and an order of the circuit court for Outagamie County: JOHN A. DES JARDINS, Judge. Affirmed
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=214799 - 2018-06-26

COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND FILED March 18, 2014 Diane M. Fremgen Clerk of Court of Appe...
, “‘they present questions of law, which we review de novo.’” See Harbor Credit Union v. Samp, 2011 WI App 40, ¶19
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=109209 - 2014-03-26

WI App 129 court of appeals of wisconsin published opinion Case No.: 2010AP1898-CR Complete Ti...
review the circuit court’s application of constitutional principles to the findings of fact de novo. Id
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=70319 - 2013-04-23

Mary A. Cruz v. All Saints Healthcare System, Inc.
action is a matter of statutory interpretation, which is a question of law subject to our de novo review
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=2651 - 2005-03-31

Russell Allen v. Wisconsin Public Service Corporation
of Lawrence & Des Rochers of St. Nazianz. 2005 WI App 40 COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6955 - 2005-03-31

Kim J. Barksdale v. Jon Litscher
and applied the doctrine of claim preclusion are questions of law that we review de novo. See Truttschel v
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6326 - 2005-03-31

COURT OF APPEALS
it was prejudicial to the defendant are reviewed de novo. Id. at 634. ¶17 We first consider all of the trial
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=58887 - 2011-01-12