Case law

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 .

Caldwell v. Brown

53 Pa. 453 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 7, 1867

In Gilman v. … In Albro v.

Yost v. Brown

126 Pa. 92 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 29, 1889

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.

Portnoy v. Brown

430 Pa. 401 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 1, 1968

Brown, does not appear therein. … Brown v. Hahn, 419 Pa. 42 , 213 A. 2d 342 (1965).

Whitaker v. Brown

46 Pa. 197 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 4, 1864

In the case of The Earl of Cardigan v. … This case is very much in point — indeed it is a direct authority for the ruling below, and it has been recognised and followed in *199 subsequent cases : Fancy v. Scott, 2 Man. & Kyl. 335; Douglass v.

Commonwealth v. Brown

544 Pa. 406 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 4, 1996

From what you personally observed do you know whether Willie Dukes knew the defendant Charles Brown? A. Yes, I believe he did know the defendant Charlie Brown. Q. What do you base that on? *418 A. … In Commonwealth v.

Pfeiffer v. Brown

165 Pa. 267 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 7, 1895

Coal Co. v. … But this, as was shown in Collins v. Chartiers Valley Gas Co., 131 Pa. 143 , does not go beyond proper use and unavoidable damage.

Brown v. Girard

4 Yeates 115 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 15, 1804

*This was objected to, on the authority of Wright v. Bernard, Park 436, that a return of survey is no evidence ^ 11 to prove the vessel not to have been seaworthy, but merely to shew a condemnation thereon.

Commonwealth v. Brown

556 Pa. 131 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 25, 1999

See Commonwealth v. … Commonwealth v. Berkowitz, 537 Pa. 143, 149 , 641 A.2d 1161, 1164 (1994). The amendment introduced the charges of Rape and IDSI with a person who is unconscious.

Brown v. Ridgway

10 Pa. 42 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 2, 1848

The true reason why error does not lie in foreign attachment, was given by Chief Justice Tilghman, in Lewis v. Wallick. … When, however, an attachment is dissolved because it issued irregularly, as where the property was not a subject of foreign attachment, the proceeding is at an end for every purpose, as it was in Miller v.

Brown v. Jones

404 Pa. 513 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 17, 1961

In Good v. … Brown crossed between intersections would not of itself declare Mrs. Brown an imprudent person. In Shuman v.

Brown v. Dempsey

95 Pa. 243 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 4, 1880

Mathias v. … It has been held in Jamison v. Collins, 2 Norris 359, which was followed by Lee v.

Brodt v. Brown

404 Pa. 391 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 26, 1961

See, Cohen v. Simpson Real Estate Corp., 385 Pa. 352 , 123 A. 2d 715 (1956); O’Donnell v. Pittsburgh, 234 Pa. 401 , 83 Atl. 314 (1912); Clad v. … Ed., etc., v. *394 Schireson, 360 Pa. 129 , 61 A. 2d 343 (1948). Laches will not be imputed where no injury has resulted to the other party by reason of the delay: Joseph Melnick B. & L. v.

Commonwealth v. Brown

455 Pa. 274 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 24, 1974

North Carolina v. Pearce, 395 U.S. 711, 723 (1969). … See Ex parte Lange, 85 U.S. (18 Wall.) 163 (1873); Commonwealth v. Silverman, 442 Pa. 211 , 275 A. 2d 308 (1971). More important for our resolution of the instant case, however, is our decision in Commonwealth v.

Wilson v. Brown

269 Pa. 225 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 31, 1920

Railroad, 195 Pa. 91 ; Glenn v. Kittanning Brewing Co., 259 Pa. 510 ; Passmore v. Allentown & Reading Traction Co., 267 Pa. 356 ; Kelly v. Thomas, 234 Pa. 419 . … It is admitted that if this complainant went before the board of directors, they would refuse to act.

Gilchrist v. Brown

165 Pa. 275 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 7, 1895

Brown, wife of Matthew J. Brown, is entitled to under a resulting trust originating in 1868. … If the evidence was in his judgment insufficient to sustain a verdict, it was his duty to withhold it from the jury: Reno v. Moss, 120 Pa. 67 ; Wylie v. Mansley, 132 Pa. 65 .

Brown v. Metz

5 Watts 164 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · May 15, 1836

In Smith v. … Lessee of Moody v. Vandyke, 4 Binn. 41 ; Vincent v. the lessee of Huff, 4 Serg. & Rawle 301 ; Griffith v. Cochran, 5 Binn 105. And by virtue of it, in Bossler v.

Travis v. Brown

43 Pa. 9 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · May 22, 1862

Taking Bank v. Whitehall, 10 S. & R., Lodge v. Pipher, Id., and Baker v. … If he had knowledge of Brown’s hand, he was to speak like other witnesses, from the exemplar in his memory. Lathrop was improperly admitted. He had not seen Brown write, and he was called to establish no test writing.

Goodyear v. Brown

155 Pa. 514 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · May 22, 1893

The plaintiff becoming aware of the survey so made appeared before the board of property to protest against the attempt to appropriate his land. … The board of property should have refused to accept the return of survey under it and to permit a patent to issue for it.