Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 8071 - 8080 of 29978 for consulta de causas.

[PDF] NOTICE
. 2 Construction of a contract is a matter of law we review de novo. Borchardt v. Wilk, 156 Wis
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=45092 - 2014-09-15

[PDF] NOTICE
de novo. State v. Murdock, 2000 WI App 170, ¶18, 238 Wis. 2d 301, 617 N.W.2d 175. “Statutory
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=57072 - 2014-09-15

[PDF] COURT OF APPEALS
the constitutionality of a search or seizure de novo, id. at 138. The arresting officer must have reasonable
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=123386 - 2017-09-21

[PDF] Jerome R. Christensen v. City of Racine Police and Fire Commission
§ 62.13(5)(i), STATS., 1991-92;2 see also State ex rel. Smits v. City of De Pere, 104 Wis.2d 26, 31, 310
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=8003 - 2017-09-19

[PDF] State v. Michael R. Meurer
v. Sutton, 177 Wis. 2d 709, 713, 503 N.W.2d 326 (Ct. App. 1993). However, despite our de novo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=7623 - 2017-09-19

State v. Carlton S. C.-B.
of “constitutional fact” reviewed de novo, see State v. Heft, 185 Wis.2d 288, 296, 517 N.W.2d 494, 498 (1994
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9526 - 2005-03-31

COURT OF APPEALS
Whether a search complies with Fourth Amendment requirements is a question of law we review de novo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=57522 - 2010-12-06

State v. Dennis Lee Wilson
. The interpretation of administrative rules is a question of law that we review de novo. Brown v. Brown, 177 Wis.2d
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12097 - 2005-03-31

COURT OF APPEALS
to serial litigation is a question of law that we review de novo. See State v. Tolefree, 209 Wis. 2d 421
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=74177 - 2011-11-21

Trisha M. Liethen v. Stephen W. Allen
judgment is de novo, and we use the same methodology as the circuit court. M&I First Nat’l Bank v
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=25343 - 2006-05-30