Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 3531 - 3540 of 29810 for des.
Search results 3531 - 3540 of 29810 for des.
[PDF]
State v. Clarence E. Pelton
de novo to rule out the possibility of error. We conclude that the sentencing court did not give
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=11795 - 2017-09-21
de novo to rule out the possibility of error. We conclude that the sentencing court did not give
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=11795 - 2017-09-21
Larry Tiepelman v. Phil Kingston
(Ct. App. 1990). However, our de novo review also allows us to independently determine whether
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15736 - 2005-03-31
(Ct. App. 1990). However, our de novo review also allows us to independently determine whether
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15736 - 2005-03-31
Curt Wenzel v. Kristy Peters
as to whether or not Ms. Peters was negligent under the circumstances. ¶4 We review de
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4331 - 2005-03-31
as to whether or not Ms. Peters was negligent under the circumstances. ¶4 We review de
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4331 - 2005-03-31
CA Blank Order
and prejudice are questions of law that we review de novo. See State v. Pitsch, 124 Wis. 2d 628, 634, 369 N.W
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=99346 - 2013-07-16
and prejudice are questions of law that we review de novo. See State v. Pitsch, 124 Wis. 2d 628, 634, 369 N.W
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=99346 - 2013-07-16
[PDF]
Pastori M. Balele v. Wisconsin Personnel Commission
because we are deciding this case on other grounds. No(s). 98-0687 3 review de novo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13721 - 2014-09-15
because we are deciding this case on other grounds. No(s). 98-0687 3 review de novo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13721 - 2014-09-15
State v. Randy J. Stahl
to undisputed material facts, we decide it de novo, without deference to the trial court’s decision. See State
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6940 - 2005-03-31
to undisputed material facts, we decide it de novo, without deference to the trial court’s decision. See State
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6940 - 2005-03-31
State v. Patrick A. Decorah
….” Id. Whether the facts meet this standard is a question of law this court reviews de novo. Id. at 54
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=5089 - 2005-03-31
….” Id. Whether the facts meet this standard is a question of law this court reviews de novo. Id. at 54
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=5089 - 2005-03-31
State v. Michael J. Arpke
an undisputed set of facts, which we review de novo. State v. Edgeberg, 188 Wis. 2d 339, 344-45, 524 N.W.2d 911
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=3625 - 2005-03-31
an undisputed set of facts, which we review de novo. State v. Edgeberg, 188 Wis. 2d 339, 344-45, 524 N.W.2d 911
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=3625 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
NOTICE
of the circuit court for Dane County: ROBERT DE CHAMBEAU, Judge. Affirmed. Before Higginbotham, P.J
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=31167 - 2014-09-15
of the circuit court for Dane County: ROBERT DE CHAMBEAU, Judge. Affirmed. Before Higginbotham, P.J
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=31167 - 2014-09-15
COURT OF APPEALS
. This is a question of law that we review de novo. If the motion raises such facts, the circuit court must hold
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=26630 - 2006-10-02
. This is a question of law that we review de novo. If the motion raises such facts, the circuit court must hold
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=26630 - 2006-10-02