Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 52331 - 52340 of 68288 for law.

State v. Cleophus Amerson
and the prejudice components are mixed questions of fact and law. Pitsch, 124 Wis.2d at 633-34, 369 N.W.2d at 714
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9791 - 2005-03-31

[PDF] Ryan Dehnel v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company
to undisputed facts, is a question of law which we decide independently, without deference to the circuit
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=14754 - 2017-09-21

Jeanne M. Lindskog v. Ronald P. Lindskog
a question of law. See id. at 492, 496 N.W.2d at 663. However, because the trial court’s legal conclusion
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13688 - 2005-03-31

[PDF] CA Blank Order
the necessary knowledge or understanding at a plea hearing is a question of law that we review de novo. Id
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=215689 - 2018-07-18

[PDF] Jeanne M. Lindskog v. Ronald P. Lindskog
. The issue of whether a spouse’s employment decision is unreasonable presents a question of law. See id
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13688 - 2014-09-15

[PDF] State v. David L. Reynolds
is a question of constitutional law which we review de novo. Id. We employ a two-step test to analyze
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10315 - 2017-09-20

[PDF] State v. Paul J. Stuart
claim as a mixed question of fact and law. We will not reverse the trial court’s factual findings
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=3975 - 2017-09-20

COURT OF APPEALS
. Whether an appeal is procedurally barred by a prior no-merit proceeding is a question of law that we
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=45542 - 2010-01-11

COURT OF APPEALS
as the instruction as a whole correctly states the law and comports with the facts of the case.” Id. ¶7
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=138472 - 2015-03-31

State v. Larry Luckett
are questions of law that we review without deference to the trial court. See State v. Pitsch, 124 Wis.2d 628
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12593 - 2005-03-31