Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 25861 - 25870 of 30059 for de.
Search results 25861 - 25870 of 30059 for de.
[PDF]
State v. Chaunte Ott
is a question of law which we review de novo. See id. First, as previously noted, the evidence did
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=12141 - 2017-09-21
is a question of law which we review de novo. See id. First, as previously noted, the evidence did
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=12141 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
State v. Timothy R. Stankus
subject to our de novo review, see State v. Xiong, 178 Wis.2d 525, 531, 504 N.W.2d 428, 430 (Ct. App
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=12782 - 2017-09-21
subject to our de novo review, see State v. Xiong, 178 Wis.2d 525, 531, 504 N.W.2d 428, 430 (Ct. App
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=12782 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
John R. Ammerman v. Paddy A. Hauden
of law, which we review de novo. Teff, 265 Wis. 2d 703, ¶42. ¶31 The general rule
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=6790 - 2017-09-20
of law, which we review de novo. Teff, 265 Wis. 2d 703, ¶42. ¶31 The general rule
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=6790 - 2017-09-20
[PDF]
Terry L. Quinn v. James E. Riley
and a denial of summary judgment. Our review is de novo, and we apply the same standard as the circuit court
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=5933 - 2017-09-19
and a denial of summary judgment. Our review is de novo, and we apply the same standard as the circuit court
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=5933 - 2017-09-19
Anthony Kish v. Health Personnel Options Corporation
; “[w]hether facts fulfill a particular legal standard is a question of law subject to de novo review
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13001 - 2005-03-31
; “[w]hether facts fulfill a particular legal standard is a question of law subject to de novo review
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13001 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
WI App 38
to the trial court; although its analysis may be helpful, we apply a de novo standard of review. Summers v
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=261986 - 2020-07-09
to the trial court; although its analysis may be helpful, we apply a de novo standard of review. Summers v
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=261986 - 2020-07-09
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
according to law, which is a question of law we review de novo. See Lloyd v. Board of Rev. of Stoughton
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=980714 - 2025-07-09
according to law, which is a question of law we review de novo. See Lloyd v. Board of Rev. of Stoughton
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=980714 - 2025-07-09
[PDF]
WI App 156
to testify at trial. This is a statutory construction question that we review de novo. See Stuart v
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=74074 - 2014-09-15
to testify at trial. This is a statutory construction question that we review de novo. See Stuart v
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=74074 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
State v. Bruce W. Ackerman
, is a question of law that this court decides de novo. See Johnson, 133 Wis. 2d at 216. ¶29 The trial
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=2650 - 2017-09-19
, is a question of law that this court decides de novo. See Johnson, 133 Wis. 2d at 216. ¶29 The trial
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=2650 - 2017-09-19
[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=475745 - 2022-01-20
, 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=475745 - 2022-01-20