Case law

Rice v. Brown

77 Ill. 549 · Illinois Supreme Court · Jun 15, 1875

This point, as regards a decree, was decided in Jackson v. … Brown, and that David Brown was not the proper party to bring suit to recover possession of the land, but the heirs of Samuel \V.

Fishback v. Brown

16 Ill. 74 · Illinois Supreme Court · Dec 15, 1854

Fishback sued Brown upon an account for twenty-nine dollars and nine cents, which Brown admitted to be correct, but claimed as a set-off the amount of a fifty dollar counterfeit bill which he had received of Fishback, and … English, the plaintiff’s clerk, went to Brown and gave him the fifty dollar bill, and got a package of money in exchange, with directions from Brown to have Gibson count it.

Brown v. Cozard

68 Ill. 178 · Illinois Supreme Court · Jun 15, 1873

Rodemeier v. Brown

169 Ill. 347 · Illinois Supreme Court · Nov 8, 1897

In Weber v. … (Walker v. Walker, supra; Reed v. Douthit, 62 Ill. 348 ; Hayes v. Boylan, 141 id. 400 ; Crabtree v. Crabtree, 159 id. 342.)

Brown v. Schintz

202 Ill. 509 · Illinois Supreme Court · Apr 24, 1903

Costly v. McGowan, 174 Ill. 76 ; Johnson v. Johnson, 187 id. 86 . … (Munn v. Burch, 25 Ill. 21 ; Brown v. Leckie, 43 id. 497 ; Wyman v. Fort Dearborn Nat. Bank, 181 id. 279, and cases cited.)

Brown v. Graham

24 Ill. 628 · Illinois Supreme Court · Apr 15, 1860

Ingraham v. Brown

231 Ill. 256 · Illinois Supreme Court · Dec 17, 1907

(Gridley v. Hopkins, 84 Ill. 528 ; Louisville and Nashville Railroad Co. v. Koelle, 104 id. 455; Henderson v. Hatterman, 146 id. 555; Smith v. Young, 160 id. 163; Thompson v. Maloney, 199 id. 276.) … (Gosselin v. City of Chicago, 103 Ill. 623 ; Hamilton v. Chicago, Burlington and Quincy Railroad Co. 124 id. 235; Clark v. McCormick, 174 id. 164; Davenport and Rock Island Bridge Railway and Terminal Co. v.

People v. Brown

108 N.E.3d 870 · Illinois Supreme Court · Sep 26, 2018

People v. Brown

312 Ill. 63 · Illinois Supreme Court · Apr 14, 1924

Justice Dunn delivered the opinion of the court: At the March term, 1922, of the circuit court of Hardin county the grand jury returned an indictment against William Brown, charging that he “feloniously, willfully and maliciously … Klawanski v. People, 218 Ill. 481 .

McGovern v. Brown

317 Ill. 73 · Illinois Supreme Court · Apr 24, 1925

(Clark v. McGee, 159 Ill. 518 ; Ewertsen v. Gerstenberg, 186 id. 344; O’Gallagher v. Lockhart, 263 id. 489; Simpson v. Mikkelsen, 196 id. 575.) … Curtis v. Rubin, 244 Ill. 88 ; Ewertsen v. Gerstenberg, supra; Kneip v. Schroeder, 255 Ill. 621 . The decree of the superior court is affirmed. Decree affirmed.

People v. Brown

136 Ill. 2d 116 · Illinois Supreme Court · Apr 18, 1990

In United States v. Brown (D. Mont. 1981), 531 F. Supp. 37 , the defendant also had been held for a custodial interrogation. Two days later the F.B.I. called him and said they wanted to question him again. … Brown, 531 F. Supp. at 40 . The second meeting lasted only about 20 minutes.

Abbott v. Brown

131 Ill. 108 · Illinois Supreme Court · Nov 26, 1889

In Dickerson v. Derrickson, 39 Ill. 574 , this court, in speaking of a guaranty, says: “The contract of an absolute guaranty is, that if the principal fails to pay, the guarantor will. … .”- See, also, Rich v. Hathaway, 18 Ill. 548 . Here, Newell, as maker of the promissory note, agreed to pay a certain sum of money at a certain time.

Eastman v. Brown

32 Ill. 53 · Illinois Supreme Court · Apr 15, 1863

Brown v. Gaffney

32 Ill. 251 · Illinois Supreme Court · Apr 15, 1863

We now see, however, that in the amount allowed Brown, is not included the moneys which he advanced to Gaffney with which to go to California.

Brown v. People

173 Ill. 34 · Illinois Supreme Court · Apr 21, 1898

Brown and William P. Bruner, late, etc., on the 25th day of May, A. … Brown and William P. Bruner. The said William R. Brown and William P.

Flowers v. Brown

21 Ill. 270 · Illinois Supreme Court · Jan 15, 1859

Hurd v. Brown

25 Ill. 616 · Illinois Supreme Court · Apr 15, 1861

Vogle v. Brown

120 Ill. 338 · Illinois Supreme Court · Mar 23, 1887

Whatever the partition decree might have been, Brown, the real party in interest, would not have been bound thereby, he not having been made a party to the suit. (Scanlan v. Cobb, 85 Ill. 296 .) … Nor, as is claimed, would there have been -any ratification of the partition decree by Brown, so as to make it binding on him, by his reception of the proceeds of the sale of the ten acres.

Brown v. Gerhardt

5 Ill. 2d 106 · Illinois Supreme Court · Jan 21, 1955

(Western Theological Seminary v. City of Evanston, 325 Ill. 511 ; Douglas v. Village of Melrose Park, 389 Ill. 98 .) … (Douglas v. Village of Melrose Park, 389 Ill. 98 .)

Brown v. Smith

24 Ill. 196 · Illinois Supreme Court · Apr 15, 1860

Fournier v. Faggott, 3 Scam. 347 ; Stephens v. Sweeney, 2 Gilm. 375 ; Russell v. The City of Chicago, 22 Ill. R. 283. … Tomlinson v. Blacksmith, 7 T. R. 182. To permit such a practice, would enable a plaintiff to claim a small amount in his summons and declaration, and to recover a larger amount on the trial.