Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 25941 - 25950 of 30059 for de.
Search results 25941 - 25950 of 30059 for de.
COURT OF APPEALS
performance was deficient or prejudiced the defense are questions of law for de novo review. Id. ¶20
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=74929 - 2011-12-07
performance was deficient or prejudiced the defense are questions of law for de novo review. Id. ¶20
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=74929 - 2011-12-07
Clarence C. Joseph v. Gary R. McCaughtry
. Review by certiorari is not a de novo inquiry. Van Ermen v. DHSS, 84 Wis.2d 57, 64, 267 N.W.2d 17, 20
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12273 - 2005-03-31
. Review by certiorari is not a de novo inquiry. Van Ermen v. DHSS, 84 Wis.2d 57, 64, 267 N.W.2d 17, 20
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12273 - 2005-03-31
Jerry Teague v. Bad River Band of the Lake Superior Tribe of Chippewa Indians
is a question of law, also subject to a de novo standard of review. See id. While we appreciate and consider
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14869 - 2005-03-31
is a question of law, also subject to a de novo standard of review. See id. While we appreciate and consider
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14869 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
review the application of constitutional principles to those facts de novo. Id. ¶11 At the motion
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=39232 - 2009-08-10
review the application of constitutional principles to those facts de novo. Id. ¶11 At the motion
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=39232 - 2009-08-10
Frontsheet
erroneous. Conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. See In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against Eisenberg
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=137147 - 2015-03-15
erroneous. Conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. See In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against Eisenberg
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=137147 - 2015-03-15
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]
COURT OF APPEALS
with the foster parents about T. J. Statutory interpretation is a question of law that we review de novo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=135632 - 2017-09-21
with the foster parents about T. J. Statutory interpretation is a question of law that we review de novo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=135632 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
are to be reviewed “under the same standard we apply to a [trial] court’s conclusions of law—de novo.” Id., ¶84
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=218405 - 2018-09-05
are to be reviewed “under the same standard we apply to a [trial] court’s conclusions of law—de novo.” Id., ¶84
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=218405 - 2018-09-05
COURT OF APPEALS
decisions de novo, applying the same methodology and legal standard employed by the circuit court. Frost v
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=97753 - 2013-06-04
decisions de novo, applying the same methodology and legal standard employed by the circuit court. Frost v
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=97753 - 2013-06-04
[PDF]
State v. Michael A. Sveum
a question of statutory interpretation, which we review de novo. See State v. Mata, 199 Wis.2d 315, 319
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=12804 - 2017-09-21
a question of statutory interpretation, which we review de novo. See State v. Mata, 199 Wis.2d 315, 319
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=12804 - 2017-09-21