Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 26241 - 26250 of 30059 for de.
Search results 26241 - 26250 of 30059 for de.
Frontsheet
findings of fact are affirmed unless clearly erroneous. Conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. See
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=140122 - 2015-04-16
findings of fact are affirmed unless clearly erroneous. Conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. See
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=140122 - 2015-04-16
COURT OF APPEALS
to participate as a party is a question of statutory interpretation that this court reviews de novo. See State
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=119396 - 2014-08-13
to participate as a party is a question of statutory interpretation that this court reviews de novo. See State
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=119396 - 2014-08-13
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
, including whether trial counsel performed deficiently, is a question of law we review de novo. Id
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=399842 - 2021-07-29
, including whether trial counsel performed deficiently, is a question of law we review de novo. Id
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=399842 - 2021-07-29
2007 WI App 218
of review is de novo without providing any citations. The docketing statement required that Roy specify
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=30160 - 2007-10-30
of review is de novo without providing any citations. The docketing statement required that Roy specify
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=30160 - 2007-10-30
Kurt F. Froebel v. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources
court, it presents a question of law which this court reviews de novo. See Loomis v. Wisconsin
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12257 - 2005-03-31
court, it presents a question of law which this court reviews de novo. See Loomis v. Wisconsin
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12257 - 2005-03-31
Frontsheet
conclusions, including whether the attorney has satisfied the criteria for reinstatement, on a de novo basis
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=81742 - 2012-04-26
conclusions, including whether the attorney has satisfied the criteria for reinstatement, on a de novo basis
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=81742 - 2012-04-26
[PDF]
State v. Willie W. Henderson
to relief is a question of law that we review de novo.” Bentley, 201 Wis. 2d at 310. (2) “However
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=6549 - 2017-09-19
to relief is a question of law that we review de novo.” Bentley, 201 Wis. 2d at 310. (2) “However
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=6549 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
dismissed MacMillan’s two certiorari petitions as untimely. We review this issue de novo. State ex rel
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=749763 - 2024-01-11
dismissed MacMillan’s two certiorari petitions as untimely. We review this issue de novo. State ex rel
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=749763 - 2024-01-11
COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND FILED May 10, 2011 A. John Voelker Acting Clerk of Court of ...
or denial of a summary judgment motion de novo, applying the same methodology as the trial court. Cole v
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=63752 - 2011-05-09
or denial of a summary judgment motion de novo, applying the same methodology as the trial court. Cole v
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=63752 - 2011-05-09
[PDF]
Columbus Park Housing Corporation v. City of Kenosha
this judgment. ¶8 We review summary judgment determinations de novo, applying the same standards
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=5034 - 2017-09-19
this judgment. ¶8 We review summary judgment determinations de novo, applying the same standards
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=5034 - 2017-09-19