Case law

Brown v. Brown

83 Misc. 597 · New York Supreme Court · Jan 15, 1914

As Vice-Chancellor McCoun said in Purcell v. Purcell, 3 Edw. … See, also, Cohen v. Cohen, 11 Misc.

Brown v. Brown

122 Misc. 714 · New York Supreme Court · Mar 15, 1924

(Tirrell v. Tirrell, 232 N. … (Reardon v. Woerner, 111 App. Div. 259 .) In France v. France [ 38 Misc.

Brown v. Brown

31 N.Y.S. 650 · New York Supreme Court · Dec 10, 1894

Mills v. Mills, 115 N. Y. 85 , 21 N. E. 714 . Mr. … Lammer v. Stoddard, 103 N. Y. 673 , 9 N. E. 328 . The whole doctrine is tersely stated in the headnote to the case of Kane v.

Brown v. Brown

55 Misc. 2d 174 · New York Supreme Court · Nov 21, 1967

Where, as here, a wife has been abandoned by her husband and left to her own resources, she may acquire a separate domicile for all purposes, including divorce (“Castellani” v. … Capaldo v. Capaldo, 263 App. Div. 984 , app. den. 264 App. Div. 755 ; see, also, 1 Foster-Freed, Law and The Family, § 5:15; and Ann. 39 A. L.

Brown v. Brown

6 How. Pr. 320 · New York Supreme Court · Dec 15, 1851

Brown v. Brown

5 Thomp. & Cook 691 · New York Supreme Court · Dec 15, 1874

Brown v. Brown

47 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 418 · New York Supreme Court · May 15, 1886

Brown v. Brown

14 N.Y. St. Rep. 941 · New York Supreme Court · Jan 28, 1888

Brown v. Brown

47 Misc. 2d 1046 · New York Supreme Court · Sep 22, 1965

Brown v. Brown

9 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 677 · New York Supreme Court · Jul 1, 1874

Brown v. Brown

3 Thomp. & Cook 477 · New York Supreme Court · May 15, 1874

Brown v. Brown

5 N.Y.S. 893 · New York Supreme Court · May 24, 1889

It provided that the plaintiff John Brown should have an interest of two undivided fifths in said property, the plaintiff James Lamb one undivided fifth, and the defendant Alice Brown two undivided fifths, “ upon his and … Genet v. Canal Co., 12 Civil Proc. R. 448 .

Brown v. Brown

82 Misc. 2d 215 · New York Supreme Court · May 23, 1975

for divorcing plaintiff under subdivision (3) of section 170 of the Domestic Relations Law and this is so even though there were no such grounds for divorce in 1955 (1959) since plaintiff was in prison until 1969 (Egli v … The better view, in my opinion, is that expressed in Brady v Brady (98 NJ Super 600). In that case the husband was sent to prison and the wife brought the action, the reverse of our situation.

Brown v. Brown

164 Misc. 792 · New York Supreme Court · Nov 6, 1937

(Williamson v. Osenton, 232 U. S. 619 .) … (Haddock v. Haddock, 201 U. S. 562, 577 ; Dean v. Dean, 241 N. Y. 240, 243 .) If Mr.

Brown v. Brown

63 Misc. 110 · New York Supreme Court · Apr 15, 1909

South wick v. Southwick, 49 N. Y. 510; Matter of Davis, 149 id. 539 ; Matter of Ludlow St., 59 App. Div. 180 ; Hartmann v. Hoffman, 76 id. 449; Peace v. Wilson, 186 N. Y. 403 , and cases there cited.

Brown v. Brown

86 Misc. 71 · New York Supreme Court · Mar 31, 1976

In the event I find I do not have jurisdiction I must refuse to proceed further and dismiss the action (Robinson v Oceanic Steam Nav. Co., supra; Cavallo v Cavallo, supra). … The court’s jurisdiction in matrimonial actions is wholly statutory, the applicable statute being section 230 of the Domestic Relations Law (Eckert v Eckert, 34 AD2d 684 ; Cocron v Cocron, 84 Misc 2d 335, 341 ).

Brown v. Brown

20 Misc. 3d 756 · New York Supreme Court · Jun 30, 2008

divorce unless a Domestic Relations Law [§ ] 177 addendum has been added to the separation agreement” and “[s]ince no such addendum has been executed . . . the plaintiffs motion [should] be denied” (affidavit of Paula Hoffman Brown … Significantly, courts “are not bound to mechanical subservience to . . . ill-chosen legislative language” where a statute, even one clear on its face, makes no sense (see Matter of Caraballo v Community School Bd.

Board v. Board

4 Abb. Pr. 295 · New York Supreme Court · Jan 15, 1857

People v. Brown

5 Misc. 3d 529 · New York Supreme Court · Sep 23, 2004

(Matter of Hearst Corp. v Clyne, 50 NY2d 707, 714 [1980]; People ex rel. Wagner v Infante, 167 AD2d 630, 631-632 [3d Dept 1990].) This issue will inevitably be confronted again in future SORA cases. … Penal Law § 230.30 [2]; §§ 230.32, 263.10, 263.11, 263.15; Le Drugstore Etats Unis v New York State Bd. of Pharm., 33 NY2d 298, 300 [1973]).

Brown v. Kimball

25 Wend. 259 · New York Supreme Court · Dec 15, 1840

See also Milward v. Temple, 1 Campb. 375. … So in the case of Whitlock v. Mus grove, 1 Cromp. & Mees.