Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 3541 - 3550 of 30059 for de.
Search results 3541 - 3550 of 30059 for de.
[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
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
Wis. 2d 235, 891 N.W.2d 823 (“We review a grant of summary judgment de novo using the same
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=426009 - 2021-09-16
Wis. 2d 235, 891 N.W.2d 823 (“We review a grant of summary judgment de novo using the same
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=426009 - 2021-09-16
[PDF]
State v. David C. Haubrich
was unlawful. II. ¶3 Whether an investigatory stop is lawful is a legal matter that we decide de novo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=2198 - 2017-09-19
was unlawful. II. ¶3 Whether an investigatory stop is lawful is a legal matter that we decide de novo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=2198 - 2017-09-19
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
CA Blank Order
District III April 14, 2015 To: Hon. John A. Des Jardins Circuit Court Judge Outagamie County
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=139576 - 2015-04-13
District III April 14, 2015 To: Hon. John A. Des Jardins Circuit Court Judge Outagamie County
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=139576 - 2015-04-13
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
State v. Daniel J. Balint
issues of constitutional fact which this court reviews de novo. State v. Dean, 163 Wis.2d 503, 511, 471
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9266 - 2005-03-31
issues of constitutional fact which this court reviews de novo. State v. Dean, 163 Wis.2d 503, 511, 471
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9266 - 2005-03-31
[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