Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 4681 - 4690 of 29773 for des.
Search results 4681 - 4690 of 29773 for des.
[PDF]
Larry L. George v. David H. Schwarz
STANDARD OF REVIEW ¶10 Our review is de novo. We owe no deference to any of the circuit court’s
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=3114 - 2017-09-20
STANDARD OF REVIEW ¶10 Our review is de novo. We owe no deference to any of the circuit court’s
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=3114 - 2017-09-20
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
of summary judgment de novo using the same methodology employed by the circuit court. Bank of N.Y. Mellon
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=404493 - 2021-08-05
of summary judgment de novo using the same methodology employed by the circuit court. Bank of N.Y. Mellon
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=404493 - 2021-08-05
Department of Revenue v. Johnson Welding & Manufacturing Company, Inc.
” or “great bearing.” The lowest level of review, the de novo standard, is applied where it is clear from
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15989 - 2005-03-31
” or “great bearing.” The lowest level of review, the de novo standard, is applied where it is clear from
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15989 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
Jonas Doyle Carter v. Crystal Marie Carter
a net marital estate of $237.09. Since the difference in the division is de minimus, a deviation from
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=7442 - 2017-09-20
a net marital estate of $237.09. Since the difference in the division is de minimus, a deviation from
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=7442 - 2017-09-20
[PDF]
WI App 32
and lowest level of deference, de novo review, applies “where it is clear from the lack of agency precedent
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=77694 - 2014-09-15
and lowest level of deference, de novo review, applies “where it is clear from the lack of agency precedent
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=77694 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
Wis. 2d 568, ¶14. Whether a defendant has met this standard is a question of law that we review de
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=251744 - 2019-12-27
Wis. 2d 568, ¶14. Whether a defendant has met this standard is a question of law that we review de
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=251744 - 2019-12-27
COURT OF APPEALS
from an order of the circuit court for Outagamie County: JOHN A. DES JARDINS, Judge. Affirmed in part
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=124615 - 2014-10-20
from an order of the circuit court for Outagamie County: JOHN A. DES JARDINS, Judge. Affirmed in part
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=124615 - 2014-10-20
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
review de novo, giving no deference to the agency’s legal conclusions.” Cree, Inc. v. LIRC, 2022 WI
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=519528 - 2022-05-10
review de novo, giving no deference to the agency’s legal conclusions.” Cree, Inc. v. LIRC, 2022 WI
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=519528 - 2022-05-10
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
to the sufficiency of the evidence de novo. State v. Smith, 2012 WI 91, ¶24, 342 Wis. 2d 710, 817 N.W.2d 410
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=862785 - 2024-11-07
to the sufficiency of the evidence de novo. State v. Smith, 2012 WI 91, ¶24, 342 Wis. 2d 710, 817 N.W.2d 410
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=862785 - 2024-11-07
[PDF]
RingTrue, Inc. v. Hollis McWethy
. This question requires the interpretation of a contract, a question of law we review de novo. See id. ¶17
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15110 - 2017-09-21
. This question requires the interpretation of a contract, a question of law we review de novo. See id. ¶17
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15110 - 2017-09-21