Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 25891 - 25900 of 30059 for de.
Search results 25891 - 25900 of 30059 for de.
COURT OF APPEALS
.”). We review de novo whether the trial court has applied the correct legal standard. Kerkvliet v
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=71741 - 2011-10-03
.”). We review de novo whether the trial court has applied the correct legal standard. Kerkvliet v
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=71741 - 2011-10-03
[PDF]
WI APP 53
is a question of law we review de novo. State v. Fawcett, 145 Wis. 2d 244, 250, 426 N.W.2d 91 (Ct. App. 1988
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=110260 - 2017-09-21
is a question of law we review de novo. State v. Fawcett, 145 Wis. 2d 244, 250, 426 N.W.2d 91 (Ct. App. 1988
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=110260 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
Frontsheet
they are found to be clearly erroneous, but we review the referee's conclusions of law on a de novo basis
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=104952 - 2017-09-21
they are found to be clearly erroneous, but we review the referee's conclusions of law on a de novo basis
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=104952 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
Robert E. Lee & Associates, Inc. v. David J. Peters
, 450, 513 N.W.2d 695, 697 (Ct. App. 1994). We review summary judgments de novo. Id. Summary
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10267 - 2017-09-20
, 450, 513 N.W.2d 695, 697 (Ct. App. 1994). We review summary judgments de novo. Id. Summary
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10267 - 2017-09-20
2006 WI APP 261
; we uphold the circuit court’s findings of fact unless clearly erroneous, but determine de novo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=27184 - 2006-12-19
; we uphold the circuit court’s findings of fact unless clearly erroneous, but determine de novo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=27184 - 2006-12-19
COURT OF APPEALS
omitted). I review de novo whether those facts satisfy the constitutional standard for ineffective
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=118622 - 2014-07-30
omitted). I review de novo whether those facts satisfy the constitutional standard for ineffective
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=118622 - 2014-07-30
COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND FILED November 16, 2006 Cornelia G. Clark Clerk of Court of ...
attorney fees under § 19.37(2)(a) de novo. See Anderson v. MSI Preferred Ins. Co., 2005 WI 62, ¶18, 281
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=27160 - 2006-11-15
attorney fees under § 19.37(2)(a) de novo. See Anderson v. MSI Preferred Ins. Co., 2005 WI 62, ¶18, 281
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=27160 - 2006-11-15
United Parcel Service Co. v. Wisconsin Department of Revenue
). Following the rationale in Consolidated Freightways, we review the issues raised by UPSCO de novo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9652 - 2005-03-31
). Following the rationale in Consolidated Freightways, we review the issues raised by UPSCO de novo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9652 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
. A. Summary Judgment ¶15 We review a trial court’s grant or denial of summary judgment de novo, owing
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=79061 - 2012-03-05
. A. Summary Judgment ¶15 We review a trial court’s grant or denial of summary judgment de novo, owing
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=79061 - 2012-03-05
COURT OF APPEALS
, which we review de novo.” Robin K. v. Lamanda M., 2006 WI 68, ¶12, 291 Wis. 2d 333, 718 N.W.2d 38. ¶34
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=29381 - 2007-06-13
, which we review de novo.” Robin K. v. Lamanda M., 2006 WI 68, ¶12, 291 Wis. 2d 333, 718 N.W.2d 38. ¶34
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=29381 - 2007-06-13