Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 25181 - 25190 of 29985 for de.
Search results 25181 - 25190 of 29985 for de.
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
reviewed de novo, we give weight to a circuit court’s decision on a claim of objective bias; we
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=155586 - 2017-09-21
reviewed de novo, we give weight to a circuit court’s decision on a claim of objective bias; we
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=155586 - 2017-09-21
State v. Stephen R. Hart
was deficient and, if it was, whether it was prejudicial are questions of law which we review de novo. State v
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=8129 - 2005-03-31
was deficient and, if it was, whether it was prejudicial are questions of law which we review de novo. State v
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=8129 - 2005-03-31
State v. Leonard T. Collins
. Stat. §§ 939.62 and 973.12. Statutory interpretation is an issue of law that we review de novo. State
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4299 - 2005-03-31
. Stat. §§ 939.62 and 973.12. Statutory interpretation is an issue of law that we review de novo. State
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4299 - 2005-03-31
2006 WI APP 210
granting summary judgment. Id. Our review is de novo. Id. ¶9 Here, Cuellar contends
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=26418 - 2006-10-30
granting summary judgment. Id. Our review is de novo. Id. ¶9 Here, Cuellar contends
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=26418 - 2006-10-30
State v. Daniel C. Tuescher
. App. 1996). This involves a question of law subject to de novo review. See id
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14459 - 2005-03-31
. App. 1996). This involves a question of law subject to de novo review. See id
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14459 - 2005-03-31
State v. Erik Gracia
and prejudiced the defendant are questions of law we review de novo. Id. at 236-37. Counsel’s performance
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4710 - 2005-03-31
and prejudiced the defendant are questions of law we review de novo. Id. at 236-37. Counsel’s performance
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4710 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
satisfies the legal elements of the crime presents a question of law, which we review de novo. Id
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=35952 - 2009-03-23
satisfies the legal elements of the crime presents a question of law, which we review de novo. Id
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=35952 - 2009-03-23
2007 WI APP 254
granting summary judgment to Moe. We review an award of summary judgment de novo, applying the same
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=31009 - 2007-12-18
granting summary judgment to Moe. We review an award of summary judgment de novo, applying the same
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=31009 - 2007-12-18
[PDF]
WI 96
erroneous. Conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. See In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against Eisenberg
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=73381 - 2014-09-15
erroneous. Conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. See In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against Eisenberg
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=73381 - 2014-09-15
COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND FILED April 2, 2015 Diane M. Fremgen Clerk of Court of Appea...
for the pertinent time period. Discussion ¶3 We review summary judgment de novo, construing the facts
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=138946 - 2015-04-01
for the pertinent time period. Discussion ¶3 We review summary judgment de novo, construing the facts
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=138946 - 2015-04-01