Case law

Stoker v. Brown

583 S.W.2d 765 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Jul 9, 1979

In Hines v. … Brown or his immediate predecessor in title who acquired the farm in 1942.

Sevier v. Brown

32 Tenn. 112 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Sep 15, 1852

question in tbis case is, whether the complainants, children of ■ Mary Caroline' Sevier, take a remainder interest in certain negroes, which they claim under the following clause of the will of their grandfather, Thomas Brown … Brown by this clause.

Brown v. Maury

85 Tenn. 358 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Jan 26, 1887

Maury was indebted to Campbell Brown as trustee of R. E. Scott, and had given him a mortgage on certain lots in Nashville to secure the indebtedness. … He then delivered it to Campbell Brown, and obtained the release of his own mortgage, without any knowledge on the part of Brown as to the manner in which the deed was obtained or prepared.

Brown v. State

26 Tenn. 155 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Dec 15, 1846

The entry of the finding of the indictment by the grand jury, and its reception by the court is as follows: “The grand jury return here into open court a bill of indictment against George Brown, in the words and figures following

Brown v. Haywood

51 Tenn. 357 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Apr 22, 1871

This is an action of trover, commenced in 1865, by Brown against Haywood, for the conversion of personal property.

Atwood v. Brown

1 Shan. Cas. 639 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Sep 15, 1876

In Barker v. … See IVIcGavock v. Deery, 1 Cold., 265 . Affirm the decree with costs, and remand the cause xo be proceeded with.

State v. Brown

169 Tenn. 119 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Jun 10, 1935

In State ex rel. v. Drummond, 128 Tenn., 271 , 160 S. … *123 State, supra, and State ex rel. v.

State v. Brown

Tennessee Supreme Court · Jun 21, 1999

BROWN, ) ) Appellant. ) ORDER The appellant, through counsel, has filed

State v. Brown

68 Tenn. 53 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Apr 15, 1876

Thus it was said “a man may have property in some things which are of so base a nature that no felony can be committed of them, as of a bloodhound or mastiff.” 7 Coke, 18a; Findlay v. … Ward v. The State, 48 Ala., 161 ; Harrington v. Miles, 11 Kan. Rep. In the case of The People v. Campbell, 4 Parkins N. Y. Cr.

State v. Brown

50 Tenn. 1 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Sep 21, 1870

Ju'lge Whyte, in delivering the opinion of this court, in the case State v. … State v. Wimberly, 3 McCord, 190 , cited in 1 Wat. Arch. Cr. Pl., 304, n. These views are further supported by the authorities cited in the same book, pp. 262, 300.

State v. Porterfield

746 S.W.2d 441 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Jan 19, 1988

In Bruton v. … In Parker v.

Perkins v. Brown

135 Tenn. 140 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Apr 15, 1916

In the original judgment all the costs of the appeal were ordered to be paid by Brown, the appellee and losing party, and in favor of Perkins. … Co. v. Shelton, 123 Tenn. 513 , 130 S. W., 843 ), he may not by thus ignoring this court rule cause unnecessary costs to accrue and prevail on a claim to recover same. “Eull costs” does not include costs so added.

Brown v. Wright

12 Tenn. 57 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Feb 15, 1833

Sherman v. Brown

12 Tenn. 561 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Mar 15, 1833

Brown v. Moore

14 Tenn. 272 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Mar 15, 1834

Brown v. Newton

14 Tenn. 436 · Tennessee Supreme Court · May 15, 1834

Brown v. M'Donald

16 Tenn. 158 · Tennessee Supreme Court · May 15, 1835

Mickle v. Brown

63 Tenn. 468 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Dec 15, 1874

Brown v. Crenshaw

64 Tenn. 584 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Dec 15, 1875

In Jackson v. Burke, 4 Heis., 610, it is said that *585 u the mere opinion of the complainant that the defendant will do a fraudulent act does not import that he is about to do it.” … Under the act of 1836, ch. 43, which awarded an attachment when the defendant was about to remove his property beyond the jurisdiction of the ■State, the court held in Lester v.

Johnson v. Brown

21 Tenn. 327 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Apr 15, 1841

The bill alleges that the complainant obtained a judgment at law against Brown for upwards of $3000, that an execution was issued, and milla bona returned thereon. … The bill also sets forth, that the said Brown and one Smithers, ai’e partners in trade, under the firm and style of Brown & Smithers, and that he had obtained against them a judgment at law, for a considerable sum, (which