Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 3761 - 3770 of 29942 for des.
Search results 3761 - 3770 of 29942 for des.
Faye V. Monicken v. John M. Monicken
erroneous. Section 805.17(2), Stats. In contrast, we review questions of law de novo. See Michael A.P
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14621 - 2005-03-31
erroneous. Section 805.17(2), Stats. In contrast, we review questions of law de novo. See Michael A.P
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14621 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
. Smits v. City of De Pere, 104 Wis. 2d 26, 31, 310 N.W.2d 607, 609 (1981); see also Gentilli v. Board
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=29838 - 2007-07-30
. Smits v. City of De Pere, 104 Wis. 2d 26, 31, 310 N.W.2d 607, 609 (1981); see also Gentilli v. Board
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=29838 - 2007-07-30
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
of fact unless they are clearly erroneous; however, we review de novo the application of constitutional
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=504233 - 2022-04-05
of fact unless they are clearly erroneous; however, we review de novo the application of constitutional
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=504233 - 2022-04-05
All City Communication Company, Inc. v. State of Wisconsin Department of Revenue
three distinct levels of deference: great weight, due weight, and de novo review.” MCI Telecomms. Corp
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=5222 - 2005-03-31
three distinct levels of deference: great weight, due weight, and de novo review.” MCI Telecomms. Corp
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=5222 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
on a motion for summary judgment de novo, applying the same methodology as the circuit court. Tensfeldt v
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=47351 - 2010-02-24
on a motion for summary judgment de novo, applying the same methodology as the circuit court. Tensfeldt v
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=47351 - 2010-02-24
[PDF]
Mineral Point Valley Limited Partnership v. City of Mineral Point Board of Review
an attempt by an appellant, based on the analysis in Soo Line, to have this court apply a de novo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=6665 - 2017-09-20
an attempt by an appellant, based on the analysis in Soo Line, to have this court apply a de novo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=6665 - 2017-09-20
[PDF]
Lee R. Krahenbuhl, DDS v. Wisconsin Dentistry Examining Board
that a reviewing court may use when examining the agency’s conclusions of law: de novo, due weight and great
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=24556 - 2017-09-21
that a reviewing court may use when examining the agency’s conclusions of law: de novo, due weight and great
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=24556 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
judgment de novo. Hardy v. Hoefferle, 2007 WI App 264, ¶6, 306 Wis. 2d 513, 743 N.W.2d 843. Summary
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=197133 - 2017-09-28
judgment de novo. Hardy v. Hoefferle, 2007 WI App 264, ¶6, 306 Wis. 2d 513, 743 N.W.2d 843. Summary
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=197133 - 2017-09-28
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
review de novo. State v. Cameron, 2012 WI App 93, ¶11, 344 Wis. 2d 101, 820 N.W.2d 433. However, we
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=621713 - 2023-02-15
review de novo. State v. Cameron, 2012 WI App 93, ¶11, 344 Wis. 2d 101, 820 N.W.2d 433. However, we
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=621713 - 2023-02-15
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
clarify the appropriate standard of review. ¶14 Jahimiak suggests that our review is de novo because
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=63998 - 2014-09-15
clarify the appropriate standard of review. ¶14 Jahimiak suggests that our review is de novo because
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=63998 - 2014-09-15