Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 26571 - 26580 of 29823 for des.

[PDF] Frontsheet
are affirmed unless clearly erroneous. Conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. See In re Disciplinary
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=252902 - 2020-01-28

Paul D. Atkinson v. Donald D. Mentzel
exists is a question of law that we review de novo. See Stauffacher v. Portside Properties, Inc., 150
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10259 - 2005-03-31

Heather A. Rippl v. Board of Bar Examiners
in administering the court's bar admission rules, but the court is obligated to make its legal determinations de
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=16429 - 2005-03-31

[PDF] Rock County Department of Human Services v. Rodney W.
raises present questions of law, which we review de novo. See id., ΒΆ20. Although our analysis differs
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=18488 - 2017-09-21

[PDF] State v. Jene R. Bodoh
interpretation and applying a statute to a set of facts are both questions of law which this court reviews de
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=17214 - 2017-09-21

Cheryl Armstrong v. Milwaukee Mutual Insurance Company
to interpret a statute as it applies to a set of facts. This presents a question of law which we approach de
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=16867 - 2005-03-31

[PDF] COURT OF APPEALS
determine de novo, however, whether trial counsel provided constitutionally deficient performance
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=377519 - 2021-06-15

[PDF] State v. William F. Williams
deficient representation is a question of law, however, which this court reviews de novo. See id. at 128
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15307 - 2017-09-21

State v. Glenn Allen Thayer
construction that we review de novo. See State v. Paulick, 213 Wis. 2d 432, 435, 570 N.W.2d 626 (Ct. App. 1997
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14950 - 2005-03-31

State v. Michael A. Sveum
to be a criminal offense is a question of statutory interpretation that we decide de novo. State v. Campbell, 2002
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=3539 - 2005-03-31