Case law

Holmes v. Brown

13 Barb. 599 · New York Supreme Court · Jul 13, 1852

of the poor of the town of Pharsalia, to recover such expenses; but that such expenses must be laid before the superintendents of the poor of Chenango county and allowed by them, and then presented to or laid before the board … (Olney v. Wickes, 18 John. 122 . Walker v. Swartwout, 12 Id. 444. 1 Mass. Rep. 208 . King v. Butler, 15 John. 281 . Macbeath v. Haldiman, 1 T. R. 172. Hodgson v. Dexter, 1 Cranch, 345 .)

Brown v. Mitchell

2 Abb. Pr. 481 · New York Supreme Court · Mar 15, 1856

I cannot but concur with Justice Parker, in Grant v. McCaughan, (4 How. Pr. … In Catlin v. Gunter, ( 1 Duer, 253 ), the court refused to amend pleadings, to conform to the evidence produced on the trial.

King v. Brown

2 Hill & Den. 485 · New York Supreme Court · May 15, 1842

I am aware of the intimation by Woodworth, J. in Burlingame v. … (Gillet v. Maynard, 5 John. R. 85; Gary v. Hull, 11 id. 441; Rice v. Peet, 15 id. 503 ; Baldwin v. Munn, 2 Wend. 399 ; Dimmick v. Lockwood, 10 id. 142; Sugd. on Tend. 219, 222.)

Smith v. Brown

6 How. Pr. 383 · New York Supreme Court · Feb 15, 1852

Doty v. Brown

4 How. Pr. 429 · New York Supreme Court · Jun 15, 1850

R., 328; Wilcox v. Jackson, 13 id. 511; 2 Howard U. S. R. 43; 3 id. 750, 762, 763; Borden v. Fitch, 15 J. R. 141; Mills v. Martin, 19 J. R. 33; Sutton v. Edgerton, 9 Cow. R. 227; Adkins v. Browner, 3 Cow. … Balcom, was a mere nullity (Bennett v. Harkness 4 How. Pr. Rep. 158 ,) and cannot be regarded as a discontinuance of the appeal.

Kidd v. Brown

2 How. Pr. 20 · New York Supreme Court · Dec 15, 1845

Smith v. Brown & Jones

167 Misc. 2d 12 · New York Supreme Court · Sep 7, 1995

v City of New York, 30 NY2d 76, 82-83 [1972]). (6) Partners owe each other a duty of undivided and undiluted loyalty (see, Birnbaum v Birnbaum, supra). … Corp. v Dormitory Auth., 111 Misc 2d 209, 224 [Sup Ct, Kings County 1981] [citing Wakeman v Wheeler & Wilson Mfg. Co., 101 NY 205, 209 (1886); Novak & Co. v Facilities Dev. Corp., 116 AD2d 891 [3d Dept 1986]).

Orange County Bank v. Brown

9 Wend. 85 · New York Supreme Court · May 15, 1832

He says, in Lane v. Colton, 1 Vin. … It was decided in Sewall, v.

Gardner v. Brown

5 How. Pr. 351 · New York Supreme Court · Oct 15, 1850

Brown v. Maxwell

6 Hill & Den. 592 · New York Supreme Court · Jul 15, 1844

But I do not understand the-eourt to lay down this restricted rule; nor-do I perceive that the infancy of Maxwell could affect the question of Brown’s liability. … (Williams v. Holland, 6 Carr. & Payne, 23; Pluckwell v. Wilson, 5 id. 375; Rathbun v. Payne, 19 Wend. 401 ; Hartfield v. Roper, *594 21 id. 619.)

Brown v. Galley

1 Hill & Den. 308 · New York Supreme Court · Jul 1, 1844

Chester v. Alker and Elmer (1 Burr., 133), and of Jackson v. … Brown, dated May 6, 1840, conveying the premises in question, subject to all the legal rights of the public in, to and over the *311 same, would enure to the benefit of the city by operation of his (Brown’s) previous written

Perkins & Brown v. Warren

6 How. Pr. 341 · New York Supreme Court · Dec 15, 1851

The plaintiff Brown made affidavit that he had entire confidence that the plaintiffs would recover judgment against the defendant for the amount claimed.

Ippolito v. Brown

204 Misc. 541 · New York Supreme Court · Jan 29, 1953

Under that statute the time limited for the commencement of an action was, in the case of infancy, extended for one year after the disability ceased (Matter of McKee v. White, 218 App. Div. 300 , affd. 244 N. Y. 610 ).

Brett v. Brown

13 Abb. Pr. 295 · New York Supreme Court · May 15, 1872

The defendant was served with the summons while attending as a witness, and was privileged from the commencement of an action against him until the expiration of a reasonable opportunity to return to his residence (Seaver v. … Robinson, 3 Duer, 622 ; Merrill v. George, 23 How. Pr., 331 ). Foreign witnesses cannot be compelled to attend, and their coming here must be voluntary.

Kimball & Rowe v. Davis & Brown

19 Wend. 437 · New York Supreme Court · May 15, 1838

The cases of Parkins v. Hawkshaw, 2 Stark. R. 223, Nelson v. Whittall, 1 Barn. & Aid. 19, Middleton v. Sanford, 4 Camp. 24, Mancot v. Bates, Bull. N. P. 171, and Whitlock v. … . & M. 511, are in favor; and Adams v. Kers, 1 Bos. & Pul. 360, Gough v. Cecil, 1 Selw. N. P. 467, n., Milward v. Temple, 1 Camp. 375, Page v. Mann, 1 Mood. & Malk. 79, Mitchell v. Johnson, id. 176, Kay v.

Bank of Orange v. Brown

1 Wend. 31 · New York Supreme Court · May 15, 1828

Brown v. Rosenbaum

175 Misc. 295 · New York Supreme Court · Nov 14, 1940

Laurent v. … In support of his claim defendant cites Yonkers v. Downey ( 309 U. S. 590 ); Oppenheimer v. Harriman National Bank & Trust Co. (301 id. 206); Bryce v. National City Bank (supra); Goess v.

Finn v. Brown

169 Misc. 436 · New York Supreme Court · Aug 29, 1938

(Noyes v. First National Bank, 180 App. Div. 162 ; affd., on opinion below, 224 N. Y. 542 ; Erb v. Banco de Napoli, 243 id. 45; 50 A. L. R. 1009; Gledhill v. Schiff, 224 N. … (Hyslop v. Clarke, 14 Johns. 458 ; Seaving v. Brinkerhoff, 5 Johns. Ch. 329 ; Grover v. Wakeman, 11 Wend. 187 .)

Hayman v. Brown

176 Misc. 176 · New York Supreme Court · Apr 16, 1941

The court may not interfere with the exercise of an honest business judgment of a board of directors; it will act only when confronted with fraudulent misconduct. … (See Gamble v. Queens County Water Co., 123 N. Y. 91, 99 .) In the final analysis no action by the court is indicated.

Kitchings v. Brown

37 Misc. 439 · New York Supreme Court · Mar 15, 1902

Justice O’Brien, in a similar case (Boyd v. Kerwin, 15 N. Y. … This case is to be distinguished from. the case of Levy v. Schreyer, 27 App. Div. 282 (and cases of like character) in which the covenant was not to erect any house, except a private dwelling.