Case law

Dan v. Brown

4 Cow. 483 · New York Supreme Court · May 15, 1825

In the case of Hands v. … Any declarations of Brown, independent of that, are not evidence.

Humphrey v. Brown

17 How. Pr. 481 · New York Supreme Court · May 15, 1859

People v. Brown

23 Wend. 47 · New York Supreme Court · Jan 15, 1840

Olmsted v. Brown

12 Barb. 657 · New York Supreme Court · Apr 27, 1852

J. in the case of Butler v. Kent, ( 19 John. 228 ,) by Cowen, J. in the case of Hastings v. Palmer, ( 20 Wend. 225 ,) and by Beardsley, J. in the case of Keenholts v. … The case of Stevens v.

Clark v. Brown

18 Wend. 115 · New York Supreme Court · Dec 15, 1837

(Almy v. Harris, 5 Johns. R. 175. Smith v. Drew, 5 Mass. … (Bush v. Brainard, 1 Cowen’s R. 78. Holladay v. Marsh, 3 Wend. R. 142. Rust v. Low, 6 Mass. R. 94 . Little v. Lathrop, 5 Greenl. R. 356.)

Ericsson v. Brown

38 Barb. 390 · New York Supreme Court · Nov 3, 1862

The decision in Conant v. Van Schaick, ( 24 Barb. 87 ,) does not touch this case. *393 [New York General Term, November 3, 1862. The finding of facts by the referee covers the whole ground.

Smith v. Brown

1 Wend. 231 · New York Supreme Court · Aug 15, 1828

Brown sued Smith in the court below, for the penalty under the tenth section of the act for the inspection of flour and meal, and to establish the standard weight of grain, passed March 5th, 1813. … In Ferris v.

Loomis v. Brown

16 Barb. 325 · New York Supreme Court · Jul 4, 1853

(See Brown v. Ricketts, 2 John. Ch. Rep. 283 ; Brinkerhoff v. Brown, 6 Id. 139; Fellows v. Fellows, 4 Cowen, 682; Fish v. Howland, 1 Paige, 20 ; Egberts v. Wood, 3 Id. 517.) The cases of Fellows v. … Fellows and Brinkerhoff v. Brown, are pertinent to show that the subject matter is identical in this case, with the point of litigation in those cases.

Brown v. Williams

4 Wend. 360 · New York Supreme Court · May 15, 1830

R. 73. 3 Brown’s C. 3. 11 Ves. 410.) These cases speak of discharging or varying the contract with the principal debtor. … In English v. Darby, (2 Bos. & Pul. 62,) Lord Eldon, speaking of the case of Hayling v. Mulhall, (2 Black.

Ellis v. Brown

6 Barb. 282 · New York Supreme Court · May 1, 1849

The indorsement of Brown was inoperative, as such, until Newell, Daniels &• Co. had indorsed their names upon it. In the language of Chief Justice Spencer, in Herrick v. … (Manrow v. Durham, 3 Hill, 584 . Luqueer v. Prosser, 1 Id. 256 ; S.. C. in error, 4 Id. 420. Miller v. Gaston, 2 Id. 188. Hunt v. Brown, 5 Id. 145. Hough v. Gray, 19 Wend. 202. Ketchell v. Burns, 24 Id. 456. 26 Id. 430.

Buckbee v. Brown

21 Wend. 110 · New York Supreme Court · May 15, 1839

J. said in Piggot v. Thompson. … See Brown v. Hodgson, 4 Taunt. 188, as to a carrier. A broker in a matter of insurance, especially if he act under a del credere commission, is also regarded as principal, and may sue or be sued *116 in his own name.

Hicks v. Brown

12 Johns. 142 · New York Supreme Court · Jan 15, 1815

essential transactions lipón which the defendant became bound to pay the .bill, took place in NemOrleans ; and as it respects him, the contract was wholly made there, which brings it .within the principle of the case of Smith v.

Brown v. Feeter

7 Wend. 301 · New York Supreme Court · May 15, 1831

Bennus v. Guyldley, Cro. … In Scheibel v.

Brown v. Ferguson

2 Denio 196 · New York Supreme Court · Feb 15, 1846

(See Slack v Brown, 13 Wend. 390 ; Graham v. Gedney, Grah. Pr. 544, note, 2d ed. This was a tender before suit brought; and it was not available to the defendant, for thereason that the money was not brought into court. … (Retan v. Drew, 19 Wend. 304 .) But the suit was not commenced until the declaration was filed and served. (Johnson v. Comstock, 6 Hill, 10 .) On a common law tender the money must be brought into court.

Brown v. Chadsey

39 Barb. 253 · New York Supreme Court · Feb 9, 1863

(Mitchell v. Jenkins, 5 B. & Adol. 588. Whalley v. Pepper, 7 Carr. & Payne, 506. Walker v. Cruikshank, 2 Hill, 297 . 1 Arch. N. P. 446.) … (See Samuel v. Payne, Doug. 358; Holley v. Mix, 3 Wend. 350 .)

Brown v. Jones

46 Barb. 400 · New York Supreme Court · Sep 3, 1866

The case is quite similar, in principle, to that of McBurney v. Wellman, ( 42 Barb. 400 .) … Rep. 462 ,) or Halsey v. Sinsebaugh, (15 id. 485 .)

Elliott v. Brown

2 Wend. 497 · New York Supreme Court · May 15, 1829

J., in Cockcroft v. … This case of Cockcroft v. Smith is referred to by all subsequent writers. The same principle was recognized in South Carolina, in the case of The State v. Wood, ( 1 Bay, 351 .)

Mumford v. Brown

1 Wend. 52 · New York Supreme Court · May 15, 1828

Moore v. Brown

16 N.Y.S. 592 · New York Supreme Court · Nov 30, 1891

Clark v. Marsiglia, 1 Denio, 317 ; Lord v. Thomas, 64 N. Y. 107 ; Parr v. Village of Greenbush, 112 N. Y. 246 , 19 N. E. Rep. 684. … Dawley v. Brown, 79 N. Y. 390 . He was at best but their licensee, and they revoked the license by their sale to the plaintiff.

Birckhead v. Brown

2 Denio 375 · New York Supreme Court · Dec 15, 1845

Brown & Co. under the circumstances stated in the special verdict became parties to that contract, and were entitled to enforce it by action against the defendants. … Brown & Co. rity of contract between the *377 plaintiffs and the defendants, and agreeing substantially with the positions laid down in the opinion of the supreme court.