Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 3061 - 3070 of 30059 for de.
Search results 3061 - 3070 of 30059 for de.
Jessica C. v. State
. Although our review of the trial court's decision is de novo, see De Bruin v. State, 140 Wis.2d 631, 635
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10462 - 2005-03-31
. Although our review of the trial court's decision is de novo, see De Bruin v. State, 140 Wis.2d 631, 635
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10462 - 2005-03-31
Patricia M. Klinger v. Prudential Property and Casualty Insurance Company
not contextually ambiguous. Klinger appeals. DISCUSSION ¶7 Our standard of review is de
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=17788 - 2005-05-24
not contextually ambiguous. Klinger appeals. DISCUSSION ¶7 Our standard of review is de
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=17788 - 2005-05-24
State v. Davon R. Malcom
the proper legal standard is a question of law which we review de novo. Id. Finally, the application
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=3646 - 2005-03-31
the proper legal standard is a question of law which we review de novo. Id. Finally, the application
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=3646 - 2005-03-31
Department of Regulation & Licensing v. State of Wisconsin Medical Examining Board
, due weight deference, and de novo review. UFE Inc. v. LIRC, 201 Wis.2d 274, 284, 548 N.W.2d 57, 61
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12091 - 2005-03-31
, due weight deference, and de novo review. UFE Inc. v. LIRC, 201 Wis.2d 274, 284, 548 N.W.2d 57, 61
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12091 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
and negligence claim on summary judgment. ¶7 We review a circuit court’s grant of summary judgment de
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=96628 - 2013-05-08
and negligence claim on summary judgment. ¶7 We review a circuit court’s grant of summary judgment de
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=96628 - 2013-05-08
[PDF]
of dangerousness de novo, without the benefit of the circuit court’s impressions of the evidentiary record.7
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=703287 - 2023-09-14
of dangerousness de novo, without the benefit of the circuit court’s impressions of the evidentiary record.7
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=703287 - 2023-09-14
State v. Hilary H. Koch, Jr.
argument by Mark S. Des Rochers of Lawrence & Des Rochers, S.C. of St. Nazianz. On behalf of the third
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=7870 - 2005-03-31
argument by Mark S. Des Rochers of Lawrence & Des Rochers, S.C. of St. Nazianz. On behalf of the third
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=7870 - 2005-03-31
Royal C. Neumann v. Town of Waukesha
of a conditional use permit for a commercial PUD in a residential district was a “de facto rezoning
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=7816 - 2005-03-31
of a conditional use permit for a commercial PUD in a residential district was a “de facto rezoning
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=7816 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
State v. Dennis J. King
review de novo. See Bank of Barron v. Gieseke, 169 Wis.2d 437, 454-55, 485 N.W.2d 426, 432 (Ct. App
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=11467 - 2017-09-19
review de novo. See Bank of Barron v. Gieseke, 169 Wis.2d 437, 454-55, 485 N.W.2d 426, 432 (Ct. App
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=11467 - 2017-09-19
Badger III Limited Partnership v. Howard
this action. Although this is a legal issue that we decide de novo, see Green Scapular Crusade, Inc. v. Town
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=8135 - 2005-03-31
this action. Although this is a legal issue that we decide de novo, see Green Scapular Crusade, Inc. v. Town
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=8135 - 2005-03-31