Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 25871 - 25880 of 30191 for de.
Search results 25871 - 25880 of 30191 for de.
[PDF]
Geoffrey L. Bilda and Virginia Schumann v. County of Milwaukee
review the dismissal of an action on summary judgment de novo, applying the same methodology
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=24574 - 2017-09-21
review the dismissal of an action on summary judgment de novo, applying the same methodology
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=24574 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
State v. Mark R. Johnson
presents a question of law, which we review de novo. State v. Loutsch, 2003 WI App 16, ¶10, 259 Wis. 2d
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=19351 - 2017-09-21
presents a question of law, which we review de novo. State v. Loutsch, 2003 WI App 16, ¶10, 259 Wis. 2d
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=19351 - 2017-09-21
Robert P. Lunke v. Village of Bangor
. ¶22 Generally, we review summary judgments de novo employing the same methodology
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15761 - 2005-03-31
. ¶22 Generally, we review summary judgments de novo employing the same methodology
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15761 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
Susan K. Roemer v. Susan Riseling
of public officer immunity is a question of law which we review de novo. Kimps v. Hill, 200 Wis.2d 1, 8
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=11559 - 2017-09-19
of public officer immunity is a question of law which we review de novo. Kimps v. Hill, 200 Wis.2d 1, 8
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=11559 - 2017-09-19
COURT OF APPEALS
to a speedy trial.[1] Our review of an issue of constitutional dimensions is de novo. State v. Borhegyi, 222
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=28760 - 2007-04-24
to a speedy trial.[1] Our review of an issue of constitutional dimensions is de novo. State v. Borhegyi, 222
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=28760 - 2007-04-24
COURT OF APPEALS
. However, because we review summary judgment motions de novo, we are not precluded from considering
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=31145 - 2007-12-12
. However, because we review summary judgment motions de novo, we are not precluded from considering
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=31145 - 2007-12-12
ANR Pipeline Company v.
can be granted are matters of law which we review de novo, owing no deference to the trial court's
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9942 - 2005-03-31
can be granted are matters of law which we review de novo, owing no deference to the trial court's
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9942 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
] Standard of Review ¶14 We review a grant of summary judgment de novo, applying the same methodology
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=85378 - 2012-07-25
] Standard of Review ¶14 We review a grant of summary judgment de novo, applying the same methodology
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=85378 - 2012-07-25
Lenticular Europe, LLC v. William T. Cunnally
of law, we review those legal rulings de novo. Town of Grand Chute v. Outagamie County, 2004 WI App 35
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=7470 - 2005-03-31
of law, we review those legal rulings de novo. Town of Grand Chute v. Outagamie County, 2004 WI App 35
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=7470 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
Wis. 2d 280, 288, 234 N.W.2d 69 (1975)). No. 2023AP2377-CR 9 ¶18 We review de novo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1013559 - 2025-09-25
Wis. 2d 280, 288, 234 N.W.2d 69 (1975)). No. 2023AP2377-CR 9 ¶18 We review de novo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1013559 - 2025-09-25