Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 3401 - 3410 of 29739 for des.
Search results 3401 - 3410 of 29739 for des.
2009 WI APP 26
(12) to undisputed facts. We interpret and apply statutes de novo. See Ashford v. DHA, 177 Wis. 2d
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=35219 - 2009-02-23
(12) to undisputed facts. We interpret and apply statutes de novo. See Ashford v. DHA, 177 Wis. 2d
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=35219 - 2009-02-23
State v. Christopher D. Brown
the police when they said they were trying to de‑escalate the situation and keep everyone – themselves
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=25946 - 2006-08-29
the police when they said they were trying to de‑escalate the situation and keep everyone – themselves
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=25946 - 2006-08-29
St. John's Home of Milwaukee v. Wisconsin Department of Health and Social Services
if the decision is very nearly one of first impression. The lowest level of review, “de novo,” “is applied where
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=11485 - 2005-03-31
if the decision is very nearly one of first impression. The lowest level of review, “de novo,” “is applied where
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=11485 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
State v. Carl R. Kramer
, we review de novo whether the trial court applied the correct legal standard to determine whether
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=16054 - 2017-09-21
, we review de novo whether the trial court applied the correct legal standard to determine whether
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=16054 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
St. John's Home of Milwaukee v. Wisconsin Department of Health and Social Services
is very nearly one of first impression. The lowest level of review, “de novo,” “is applied where
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=11485 - 2017-09-19
is very nearly one of first impression. The lowest level of review, “de novo,” “is applied where
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=11485 - 2017-09-19
State v. Ernest J. P., Jr.
of the circuit court for Waukesha County: LINDA M. VAN DE WATER, Judge. Affirmed. ¶1 SNYDER, P.J.[1
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=21324 - 2006-02-07
of the circuit court for Waukesha County: LINDA M. VAN DE WATER, Judge. Affirmed. ¶1 SNYDER, P.J.[1
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=21324 - 2006-02-07
[PDF]
State v. Camille N. Skotnicki
de novo. See State v. Walters, 224 Wis. 2d 897, 901, 591 N.W.2d 874, 875-76 (Ct. App. 1999
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15921 - 2017-09-21
de novo. See State v. Walters, 224 Wis. 2d 897, 901, 591 N.W.2d 874, 875-76 (Ct. App. 1999
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15921 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
Dennis Dvorak v. Columbia Health System, Inc.
court's grant of summary judgment is de novo. See Green Spring Farms v. Kersten, 136 Wis.2d 304, 315
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=11988 - 2017-09-21
court's grant of summary judgment is de novo. See Green Spring Farms v. Kersten, 136 Wis.2d 304, 315
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=11988 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
State v. Ernest J. P., Jr.
M. VAN DE WATER, Judge. Affirmed. No. 2004AP3182 2 ¶1 SNYDER, P.J. 1 Ernest J.P
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=21324 - 2017-09-21
M. VAN DE WATER, Judge. Affirmed. No. 2004AP3182 2 ¶1 SNYDER, P.J. 1 Ernest J.P
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=21324 - 2017-09-21
COURT OF APPEALS
de novo. Id. Gallentine bears the burden of proof on both requirements of the ineffective
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=46611 - 2010-02-01
de novo. Id. Gallentine bears the burden of proof on both requirements of the ineffective
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=46611 - 2010-02-01