Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 3061 - 3070 of 29722 for des.
Search results 3061 - 3070 of 29722 for des.
Norman S. De Ruyter v. American Family Mutual Insurance Company
Title of Case: †Petition for review filed Norman S. De Ruyter, Plaintiff
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6923 - 2005-03-31
Title of Case: †Petition for review filed Norman S. De Ruyter, Plaintiff
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6923 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
will not resolve the litigation and will instead complicate it. This is so, it argues, because under Frow v. De La
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=30574 - 2007-10-10
will not resolve the litigation and will instead complicate it. This is so, it argues, because under Frow v. De La
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=30574 - 2007-10-10
W.T. Corporation v. The 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=7815 - 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=7815 - 2005-03-31
City of Waukesha v. Town Board of the Town of
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=7814 - 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=7814 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
WI APP 25
the decision of the Board, not that of the circuit court, and we do so de novo. State ex rel. Sprewell v
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=45402 - 2014-09-15
the decision of the Board, not that of the circuit court, and we do so de novo. State ex rel. Sprewell v
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=45402 - 2014-09-15
Jeffrey Allen v. Waukesha County Board of Adjustment
decision de novo. See Miswald v. Waukesha County Bd. of Adjustment, 202 Wis.2d 401, 408, 550 N.W.2d 434
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=11666 - 2005-03-31
decision de novo. See Miswald v. Waukesha County Bd. of Adjustment, 202 Wis.2d 401, 408, 550 N.W.2d 434
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=11666 - 2005-03-31
State v. Fontaine Baker
, which we review de novo. Pitsch, 124 Wis. 2d at 634. The defendant has the burden of persuasion
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4253 - 2005-03-31
, which we review de novo. Pitsch, 124 Wis. 2d at 634. The defendant has the burden of persuasion
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4253 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
review de novo. Id. 3 Jon Litscher was Department
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=502059 - 2022-03-31
review de novo. Id. 3 Jon Litscher was Department
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=502059 - 2022-03-31
[PDF]
Perry Margoles v. State of Wisconsin Labor and Industry Review Commission
, or reviewed de novo. We conclude that LIRC’s decision is entitled to great weight deference. On appeal
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=12043 - 2017-09-21
, or reviewed de novo. We conclude that LIRC’s decision is entitled to great weight deference. On appeal
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=12043 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
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.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10462 - 2017-09-20
. 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.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10462 - 2017-09-20