Case law

Brown v. McBride

24 Misc. 235 · New York Supreme Court · Jul 15, 1898

There was no error in this (Prince v. Brooklyn Eagle, 16 Misc. Rep. 186 ; Ullrich v. N. Y. Press Co., 23 Misc. Rep. 168 ; Cady v. Brooklyn Union Co., 23 Misc. Rep. 409 ; Shanks v. Stumpf, 23 Misc. Rep. 264 ). … Evidence in mitigation has to do only with the question of smart money (Millard v. Brown, 35 N. Y. 297 , and cases supra). , . The motion for a new trial on the minutes is denied. Motion denied.

Brown v. Buckingham

11 Abb. Pr. 387 · New York Supreme Court · Dec 15, 1860

White v. Brown

5 Lans. 78 · New York Supreme Court · Jun 15, 1871

It was held in Durell v. Mosher (8 J. … Such I understand to be the view of Lord Ellenbokough in Severin v. Keppell (4 Esp., 156). There plaintiff delivered plate to defendant (a silversmith) to put glasses in.

Brown v. Guichard

37 Misc. 78 · New York Supreme Court · Jan 15, 1902

Grant v. Bank, 97 N. Y. 80 ; Stucky v. Bank, 108 id. 74; Barbour v. Priest, 103 id. 293; Bank v. Cook, 95 id. 343.

People v. Brown

173 Misc. 2d 542 · New York Supreme Court · Jul 8, 1997

He cited People v Jones ( 62 AD2d 356 ) and People v Valderama ( 161 AD2d 820 ) in which the court did not allow the People to introduce, on their direct case, the amount of money found on a defendant who was charged with … The court initially ruled that the money found on one of the defendants could not come in during direct examination by the People based upon case law prevailing in the Second Department (People v Edwards, 199 AD2d 334 ).

Rose v. Brown

186 Misc. 553 · New York Supreme Court · Oct 27, 1945

Co. v. … Brown. If the plaintiff had been required to reach Brown in New York City, his rights would have been lost. Under these circumstances it is held that defendant Brown is before the court in these proceedings.

Brown v. Wing

170 Misc. 2d 554 · New York Supreme Court · Oct 18, 1996

(See, Matter of Jones v Berman, 37 NY2d 42, 57 .) … Y. v Soto-Lopez, supra, 476 US, at 903, 904 ).

Gillis v. Brown

5 Cow. 388 · New York Supreme Court · Feb 15, 1826

Brown v. Finkelstein

193 Misc. 311 · New York Supreme Court · Oct 22, 1948

Stutson & Bank of Utica v. Brown & Brown

7 Cow. 732 · New York Supreme Court · Oct 15, 1827

Jackson v. Brown

26 N.Y.S. 156 · New York Supreme Court · Dec 1, 1893

Cheever v. Brown

7 N.Y.S. 918 · New York Supreme Court · Jun 13, 1889

The appeal papers in the case of Abbott v. Thomas 1 have been submitted to me upon this motion. They contain an opinion rendered by Mr. Justice Bartlett upon an application similar to the present one.

Brown v. Coleman

8 N.Y.S. 808 · New York Supreme Court · Feb 12, 1890

In the case of Patton v. Baking Powder Co., 114 N. Y. 1 , 20 N. E.

Brown v. Werblin

138 Misc. 29 · New York Supreme Court · May 28, 1930

(Gilbert Paper Co. v. Prankard, 204 App. Div. 83 ; Schantz v. Oakman, 163 N. Y. 148 .) … (Dykman v. Keeney, 154 N. Y. 483 ; Marsh v. Kaye, supra.)

Brown v. Walter

145 N.Y.S. 859 · New York Supreme Court · Dec 15, 1913

Brown & Sons Dumber Company of Louisville, Ky., or their authorized representative, nine hundred and fifty dollars ($950.00), to be paid out of my contract with Mr. William C. … Brown & Sons Lumber Co., or their representative, seven hundred dollars ($700.00) on or about July 10th, balance two hundred and fifty dollars ($250.00), to be paid by August 1st, or sooner if possible.

Wormser v. Brown

25 N.Y.S. 553 · New York Supreme Court · Oct 13, 1893

In November, 1892, the defendant trustees, upon notice to the plaintiffs, made an application to the said park board to rescind the resolution of said board revoking said permit; and the said board, after having heard both … defendants that no-relief could be granted to the plaintiffs because the windows had been finished, even if this action had been commenced as soon as-their construction had been begun, citing decision in case of Fire Department v.

Brown v. Evans

39 Misc. 3d 171 · New York Supreme Court · Mar 9, 2012

(Morrissey v Brewer, 408 US at 484 ; Mayfield v Evans, 93 AD3d at 107-109 .) … Council of Teachers v Board of Coop. Educ. Servs. of Nassau County, 63 NY2d 100, 102-103 [1984]; Matter of Camacho v Kelly, 57 AD3d 297, 299 [1st Dept 2008].)

Smith v. Brown

3 How. Pr. 9 · New York Supreme Court · Dec 15, 1846

Quereau v. Brown

17 N.Y.S. 644 · New York Supreme Court · Feb 8, 1892

Code Civil Proc. § 1021; Liegeois v. McCrackan; 22 Hun, 69 ; Rum. Pr. 236, 237; Gray v. Rothschild, 13 Civil Proc. R. 359 . … Gray v. Rothschild, *645 supra; Bank v. Bussell, 14 Abb. N. C. 99 ; Bank v. Lynch, 76 N. Y. 514 . The order should be reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, and the motion should be denied, with $10 costs.

Hopper v. Brown

34 Misc. 661 · New York Supreme Court · Apr 15, 1901

Fowler v. Bowery Sav. Bank, 113 N. Y. 455 ; Goodwin v. Griffis, 88 id. 629. The six-year limitation *662 (Code, § 382), therefore, controls. On August 1, 1894, the unauthorized payment was made. … Such an action, therefore, would not be barred by the statute until February 1, 1902 (Hall v. Brennan, 140 N. Y. 409 ; Riley v. Riley, 141 id. 409 ; Adams v. Fassett, 149 id. 61), and suit was brought January 5, 1901.