Case law

Powley v. Brown

206 A.D.2d 851 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 15, 1994

Powley v. Brown

206 A.D.2d 851 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 15, 1994

Brown v. Irvin

179 A.D.2d 1071 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jan 31, 1992

Bleck v. Brown

217 A.D.2d 766 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 13, 1995

Neither party nor the Law Guardian has raised the court’s failure to hold a hearing on this appeal; we conclude that the parties waived a hearing (see, Matter of Thomson v Thomson, 102 AD2d 955 ). … relocation will not be judicially sanctioned in the absence of exceptional or compelling circumstances, and the heavy burden of proving said circumstances is upon the custodial parent who seeks relocation” (Matter of Skeval v

People v. Brown

168 A.D.2d 564 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 17, 1990

La Belle, 18 NY2d 405 ; People v Taylor, 141 AD2d 581 ; Matter of John G., 118 AD2d 646 ; People v Hayes, 117 AD2d 621 ). … P., Brown, Kunzeman and Miller, JJ., concur.

Iron v. Brown

18 A.D.2d 996 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 26, 1963

It is not a novel question; this court, in Augstein v. Levey (3 A D 2d 595, 599-600, affd. 4 N Y 2d 791) had occasion to determine the question explicitly, albeit alternatively. Concur — Botein, P.

People v. Brown

159 A.D.2d 235 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 6, 1990

By unanimous decision of this court, the codefendant’s conviction was affirmed on March 3, 1988 (People v Johnson, 138 AD2d 984 ).

People v. Brown

295 A.D.2d 442 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 10, 2002

Therefore, the statements were admissible under the excited utterance exception to the hearsay rule (see People v Brown, 70 NY2d 513, 519 ; People v Edwards, 47 NY2d 493 ; People v Harris, 276 AD2d 562, 563 ; People v Montalbo … Moreover, the nature of the question was investigatory (see People v Centano, 76 NY2d 837 ; People v Ellerbe, supra at 570 ; see also People v Yukl, supra; People v Portier, supra; People v King, 222 AD2d 699 ; People v Mosley

Mullane v. Brown

188 A.D.2d 323 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 8, 1992

Nor do we find the penalty imposed disproportionate to the offense (see, Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., 34 NY2d 222 ). Concur — Murphy, P. J., Rosenberger, Kassal and Rubin, JJ.

Brown v. Material

204 A.D.2d 1027 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 27, 1994

Brown, a truck driver, against defendant Mr. Seconds Building Material (Mr. Seconds) to recover for personal injuries sustained by plaintiff as the result of the negligence of Mr. … Seconds’ employees in their "use or operation”, i.e., unloading (see generally, Kessler v Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. [appeal No. 3], 158 AD2d 974 , 975; Matter of 20th Century Ins. Co. [Lumbermen’s Mut. Cas.

People v. Brown

186 A.D.2d 450 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Oct 20, 1992

People v. Brown

278 A.D.2d 60 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 12, 2000

The right to a public trial may be waived by failure to make appropriate objection (see, People v Pollock, 50 NY2d 547, 550 ; People v Marathon, 97 AD2d 650 ; see also, Levine v United States, 362 US 610, 619 ).

People v. Brown

167 A.D.2d 833 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 16, 1990

People v. Brown

179 A.D.2d 1006 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jan 31, 1992

People v. Brown

234 A.D.2d 312 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 2, 1996

People v. Brown

240 A.D.2d 587 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 16, 1997

NY2d 641 ; People v Udzinski, 146 AD2d 245, 250 ). … In any event, any error in allowing the testimony in question was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt (see, People v Crimmins, 36 NY2d 230 ). Miller, J. P., Copertino, Sullivan and Altman, JJ., concur.

People v. Brown

145 A.D.2d 338 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 13, 1988

Scheurer v. Brown

73 N.Y.S. 877 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jan 10, 1902

Viele v. Judson, 82 N. Y. 32 ; Trustees v. Wheeler, 61 N. Y. 88 ; Owen v. Evans, 134 N. Y. 614 , 31 N. E. 999 . … Schafer v. Reilly, supra.

People v. Brown

178 A.D.2d 420 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 2, 1991

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620 ), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. … In this regard, we note that the complainant’s testimony demonstrated that the defendant used physical force during the commission of the robbery (see, e.g., People v Crespo, 158 AD2d 466 ; People v Johnstone, 131 AD2d 782

People v. Brown

143 A.D.2d 524 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Sep 27, 1988

Under the circumstances, the trial court properly concluded that the showup procedure was not unduly suggestive (People v Love, 57 NY2d 1023 ; People v Brooks, 125 AD2d 481 , lv denied 69 NY2d 877 ; People v Kennerly, 117