Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filtersohio

10,000+ results

0.72s

  • State v. Brown

    62 Ohio St. 3d 1507 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jan 29, 1992

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • State v. Brown

    62 Ohio St. 3d 1449 · Ohio Supreme Court · Oct 25, 1991

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Derr v. Brown

    4 Ohio Law. Abs. 603 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jun 25, 1926

    This action was brought originally in the Crawford Common Pleas by Frank Derr against Jacob Brown and E. M. Loyer partners, doing business as Brown and Loyer. … Under instructions from Brown Mr. Derr certified on the bill of lading that the hay was sold to Brown and Loyer. The judgment of the Common Pleas'in favor of Brown was affirmed by the Court of Appeals.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Brown v. Pangle

    77 Ohio St. (N.S.) 608 · Ohio Supreme Court · Nov 12, 1907

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Sprague v. Brown

    1 Ohio Law. Abs. 276 · Ohio Supreme Court · Mar 13, 1923

    (Nixon & Chatfield v. Nash & Atkison, 12 Ohio St., 647 , distinguished.) Judgment of .the Court of Appeals, reversed and judgment for plaintiff in. error. Marshall, C. J., Wanamaker, Jones, Matthias and Day, JJ., concur.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Bashore v. Brown

    1 Ohio Law. Abs. 436 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jul 1, 1923

    The provisions of Section 1214, General Code giving the owner the right to file such objections and authorizing the board of county commissioner!

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Brown v. Hester

    88 Ohio St. (N.S.) 596 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jun 17, 1913

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Brown v. Dusha

    89 Ohio St. (N.S.) 403 · Ohio Supreme Court · Oct 21, 1913

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Brown v. Bank

    41 Ohio St. (N.S.) 445 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jan 15, 1884

    The fact that that thing was, with Brown’s consent, bid in by Griffith, and that Brown thereafter released to Griffith all Brown’s rights in it, could not give it any value. … Brown’s accommodation. See Erwin v. Shaffer, 9 Ohio St., 48 . Griffith was bound to take notice of this presumption.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Brown v. Grove

    73 Ohio St. (N.S.) 379 · Ohio Supreme Court · Dec 12, 1905

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Brown v. Ricketts

    74 Ohio St. (N.S.) 426 · Ohio Supreme Court · Feb 20, 1906

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Brown v. Burdick

    25 Ohio St. (N.S.) 260 · Ohio Supreme Court · Dec 15, 1874

    Mears v. Mears, 15 Ohio St. 90 . … In the ease of Yager v.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Spangler v. Brown

    26 Ohio St. (N.S.) 389 · Ohio Supreme Court · Dec 15, 1875

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Brown v. Clark

    70 Ohio St. (N.S.) 450 · Ohio Supreme Court · Mar 29, 1904

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Brown v. Gray

    83 Ohio St. (N.S.) 462 · Ohio Supreme Court · Nov 15, 1910

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Lockhart v. Brown

    31 Ohio St. (N.S.) 431 · Ohio Supreme Court · Dec 15, 1877

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Brown v. Parham

    71 Ohio St. (N.S.) 516 · Ohio Supreme Court · Nov 29, 1904

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Wichterman v. Brown

    170 Ohio St. (N.S.) 25 · Ohio Supreme Court · Oct 20, 1959

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Brown v. Macklin

    4 Ohio Law. Abs. 359 · Ohio Supreme Court · Apr 3, 1926

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Treon v. Brown

    14 Ohio St. 483 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jan 15, 1846

    So far as is known, the'rule, as established in Walton v. Shelley, 1 Term, 296, has been uniformly followed in this state. … Notwithstanding tho old rule of Lord Mansfield has been disregarded in some of the state courts, and shaken by more recent English decisions, it has been steadily ad *489 hered to by the Supreme Court of the United States (Henderson v.

    Cited 0 timesPublished

Ask Donna

Ask Donna

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.