Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 26131 - 26140 of 29966 for de.

2010 WI App 104
753, 780 N.W.2d 210 (citation omitted; alteration in Lesik). We review de novo the legal question
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=51689 - 2010-08-24

State v. Johnnie Carprue
is de novo. State v. Littrup, 164 Wis. 2d 120, 473 N.W.2d 164 (Ct. App. 1991). We conclude
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=5787 - 2005-03-31

[PDF] Banc One Building Management Corporation v. W.R. Grace Co.--Conn.
are purely economic damages, and that any other property damages are de minimis or coincidental
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=9987 - 2017-09-19

[PDF] Ozga Enterprises, Inc. v. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources
dispositive. MARQUETTE COUNTY Our review of a grant of summary judgment is de novo and we apply
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=7805 - 2017-09-19

M&I Marshall & Ilsley Bank v. Urquhart Companies
in an action as a matter of right under Wis. Stat. ยง 803.09(1) is a question of law we decide de novo. Armada
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=19623 - 2005-10-27

Walworth County v. Therese B.
protective placement are questions of law, which we review de novo. At a hearing on a petition
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6363 - 2005-03-31

Amy L. Walker v. University of Wisconsin Hospitals
de novo whether the therapist's duty in re-tying the restraints was so "`absolute, certain
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=8433 - 2005-03-31

Theresa Dittberner v. Windsor Sanitary District Number 1
the same methodology as the trial court and we consider the issues de novo. Green Spring Farms v. Kersten
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10607 - 2005-03-31

[PDF] COURT OF APPEALS
was prejudicial are questions of law we review de novo. State v. Sanchez, 201 Wis. 2d 219, 236, 548 N.W.2d 69
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=614483 - 2023-01-25

State v. Donald L. Long
, the deficiency was prejudicial are questions of law, which we decide de novo. Pitch, 124 Wis.2d at 634, 369 N.W
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=7736 - 2005-03-31