Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 2551 - 2560 of 29966 for de.

Wisconsin Court System - Third Branch eNews
Court. Before his current role, Hoffer worked at De La Mora & De La Mora in Elm Grove, representing
/news/thirdbranch/aug24/judappointments.htm - 2026-01-09

State v. Christina M. Goerlitz
. APPEAL from an order of the circuit court for Grant County: robert p. van de hey, Judge. Affirmed
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15783 - 2005-03-31

COURT OF APPEALS
the prosecutor’s conduct breached the terms of the plea agreement is a question of law that we review de novo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=36585 - 2005-05-26

State v. David J.M.
meets statutory and constitutional standards is a question of law which we review de novo. See id
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13881 - 2005-03-31

COURT OF APPEALS
, the court seemed to de-emphasize the incident. When addressing the custody issue, the court stated: “So I
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=31654 - 2008-01-28

COURT OF APPEALS
omitted). We review de novo whether a party has met its burden of establishing a prima facie case. Id
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=93293 - 2013-02-26

[PDF] Joseph P. LaPere v. June Gengler
is a question of law, which we review de novo. See Heinritz v. Lawrence Univ., 194 Wis.2d 606, 610, 535 N.W
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15356 - 2017-09-21

Walgreen Co. v. Wisconsin Pharmacy Examining Board
guidance,” we will owe no deference to the agency’s interpretation; we will review it de novo, giving
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12526 - 2005-03-31

[PDF] State v. Crystal Porter
for a No. 00-2304-CR 5 warrantless search is voluntary, however, are matters that we review de novo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=2954 - 2017-09-19

David A. Becker v. Aramia I, Ltd.
of a written contract is normally a question of law that we will review de novo. See Eden Stone Co. v
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14574 - 2005-03-31