Case law

Mulheirn v. Brown

322 Pa. 171 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 23, 1936

In Polonofsky v. … The condition of the roadway was obvious to him and he was bound to have it in contemplation in operating his car: Griffith v. V. A. Simrell & Son Co., 304 Pa. 165 ; Cook v.

Brown v. White

206 Pa. 106 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · May 11, 1903

Stewart v. Brown

2 Serg. & Rawle 461 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 9, 1816

Commonwealth v. Brown

489 Pa. 285 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 30, 1980

Question: Did Stanley Brown help you? Answer: Yes. Question: Whose idea was it to rob the insurance man? Answer: Stanley Brown.” ****** Stanley Brown tells you — “I don’t know why he said I did it. I was at a party.” … Brown’s. . . [D]idn’t he tell us he would say anything to get out of his predicament? . .

Brown v. Pittsburgh

409 Pa. 357 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 26, 1962

Brown, on January 26, 1959, fell and was seriously injured while walking on the sidewalk in front of the East Liberty Presbyterian Church (Church) in the City of Pittsburgh. On October 12,1960, Helen L. … Brown and her husband, Charles F.

Brown v. Girard

1 Binn. 40 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 31, 1803

The protest of the master of a vessel was first ruled to be evidence in the case of Nixon v. Harper v. Long, in 1762.

Commonwealth v. Brown

210 Pa. 29 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 4, 1904

Chalfant v. Edwards, supra, and McCleary v. … In Malloy v.

Commonwealth v. Brown

503 Pa. 514 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 29, 1983

Commonwealth v. Brown, 281 Pa.Super. 348 , 422 A.2d 203 (1980). This appeal follows. I. In Ashe v. … See Commonwealth v. Brown, 473 Pa. 458, 463 , 375 A.2d 331 (1977).

Commonwealth v. Brown

438 Pa. 52 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 22, 1970

In Commonwealth v. … In Commonwealth v.

Brown v. French

104 Pa. 604 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 9, 1883

It is possible that he might have accomplished his purpose and passed in safety the head of the Brown’s tow, had his oars not been unshipped or broken, but this resulted from no act of the crew of the' Charlie Brown ; it … So the pilot of the Charlie Brown may have made a mistake in not backing his boat, but he cannot be charged with negligence.

Commonwealth v. Brown

346 Pa. 192 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 4, 1942

In the case of Com. v. … S. v.

Commonwealth v. Brown

550 Pa. 580 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 17, 1998

See Commonwealth v. … Commonwealth v.

Smith v. Brown

3 Binn. 201 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 20, 1810

The rule of this court has been, since the case of Millar v. Hall, to discharge on common bail, unless the state,-under which the discharge was given, refuses to extend the same courtesy to the citizens of this state.

Brown v. Hahn

419 Pa. 42 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 29, 1965

Brown and Helen M. Brown, his wife (Browns), were high bidders at the auction both on the individual parcels and on the entirety. … The auctioneer “knocked down” the properties to Browns, Browns tendered the required deposit but Hahns refused the tender and stated that they would not sell to Browns.

Brown v. Unger

269 Pa. 471 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 21, 1921

pleadings, and considering the able argument of counsel for appellants, we cannot say it is “clear and free from doubt” that the court below erred in refusing judgment; following the usual course pursued in such cases (Wilson v.

Brown v. George

344 Pa. 399 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 30, 1942

Justice Stern, In this action the statement of claim alleged that the wife plaintiff was in the act of boarding a streetcar when the motorman closed the doors prematurely, pinioning her between them. … A motion for judgment n. o. v. must be based upon pleadings and evidence and not upon arguments made by counsel to the jury: see Plummer v. Hillside Coal & Iron Co., 96 Pa. Superior Ct. 180, 184 .

Brown v. Caldwell

10 Serg. & Rawle 114 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 15, 1823

Zouch v. Parsons, 3 Burr. 1807. … The reasons are fully studied in Mather v. The Ministers of Trinity Church, 3 Serg. & Rawle, 509, and Baker v. Howell, 6 Serg. & Rawle, 416 .

Brown v. White

202 Pa. 297 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 21, 1902

“We do not doubt,” said Gordon, J., in Knauss v. … To the same effect are Fow v. Roberts, 108 Pa. *312 489 , Wunder v. McLean, 134 Pa. 334 , and Reading City v. Reiner, 167 Pa. 41 .

Commonwealth v. Brown

436 Pa. 423 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 9, 1970

As appellant points out, to do so would mean overruling Commonwealth v. Walters, supra, and its progeny. See Commonwealth v. Minnick, 436 Pa. 42 , 258 A. 2d 515 (1969); Commonwealth v. … See, e.g., Commonwealth v.

Commonwealth v. Brown

467 Pa. 512 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 6, 1976

Brown’s counsel requested neither a mistrial nor curative instructions and the Commonwealth’s summation continued. Under the circumstances, the issue is waived. Commonwealth v. … Glenn, 459 Pa, 662, 330 A.2d 535 *518 (1974); Rule 1118 of Pa.R.Crim.P. 5 Here, as in Glenn , Brown has been granted all that he had requested. See also Commonwealth v.