Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 7691 - 7700 of 30081 for consulta de causas.
Search results 7691 - 7700 of 30081 for consulta de causas.
[PDF]
January Unpublished Orders
. 2006AP001438 City of Altoona v. Steven W. Limpert 2006AP001533 City of Eau Claire v. Kenneth R. Van De Hei
/ca/unpub/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=28062 - 2014-09-15
. 2006AP001438 City of Altoona v. Steven W. Limpert 2006AP001533 City of Eau Claire v. Kenneth R. Van De Hei
/ca/unpub/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=28062 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
is a question of law that we review de novo. State v. Jones, 2002 WI App 208, ¶8, 257 Wis. 2d 163, 650 N.W.2d
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=865741 - 2024-10-23
is a question of law that we review de novo. State v. Jones, 2002 WI App 208, ¶8, 257 Wis. 2d 163, 650 N.W.2d
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=865741 - 2024-10-23
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
to relief. This is a question of law that we review de novo.” State v. Allen, 2004 WI 106, ¶9, 274 Wis
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=76820 - 2014-09-15
to relief. This is a question of law that we review de novo.” State v. Allen, 2004 WI 106, ¶9, 274 Wis
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=76820 - 2014-09-15
State v. Paul J. Koch
that we review de novo. See State v. Manthey, 169 Wis.2d 673, 685, 487 N.W.2d 44, 49 (Ct. App. 1992
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13237 - 2005-03-31
that we review de novo. See State v. Manthey, 169 Wis.2d 673, 685, 487 N.W.2d 44, 49 (Ct. App. 1992
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13237 - 2005-03-31
State v. Neil P. Gates
. Our review of the magistrate’s probable cause determination is not de novo, even though it presents
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15171 - 2005-03-31
. Our review of the magistrate’s probable cause determination is not de novo, even though it presents
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15171 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
State v. Feliciano T. Douglas
in the trial court’s decision on his postconviction motion. However, our review is de novo, id. at 634
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=5997 - 2017-09-19
in the trial court’s decision on his postconviction motion. However, our review is de novo, id. at 634
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=5997 - 2017-09-19
State v. Kenneth L. Champion
-10. Whether the pleading meets this test is a question of law that we review de novo. Id. at 310
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=3488 - 2005-03-31
-10. Whether the pleading meets this test is a question of law that we review de novo. Id. at 310
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=3488 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
a sufficient reason for failing to bring available claims earlier is a question of law” that we review de
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1041687 - 2025-11-25
a sufficient reason for failing to bring available claims earlier is a question of law” that we review de
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1041687 - 2025-11-25
[PDF]
State v. Deborah J. Burch
meet this standard is a question of law, which we review de novo. See id. at 54. ¶7 We conclude
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=2478 - 2017-09-19
meet this standard is a question of law, which we review de novo. See id. at 54. ¶7 We conclude
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=2478 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
FICE OF THE CLERK
de novo whether claim preclusion applies to a factual scenario. Id. In this case, we agree
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1069331 - 2026-01-28
de novo whether claim preclusion applies to a factual scenario. Id. In this case, we agree
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1069331 - 2026-01-28