Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
6,256 results
0.66s
57 Tenn. 380 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Apr 15, 1872
and other property of Brown. … the Chancellor erred in his view of the *382 law, as to the supposed defects in the publication made, and in holding the rule laid down by this court as to requisites of a notice by publication in the case of Riley et al v.
Cited 0 timesPublished23 Tenn. 292 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Dec 15, 1843
Brown and Ira E. Brown, before a Justice of the Peace, upon claims evidenced by bills single. One Robert S. Harris, at the instance and request of W. R. Brown, but not at the instance or request of Ira E. … Brown. Let the judgment be reversed.
Cited 0 timesPublished48 Tenn. 444 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Sep 15, 1870
Some twelve months after the rendition of this judgment, Brown filed his petition for writs of certiorari and supersedeas, seeking a new trial of the ease. … McDowell v. Turney, 5 Sneed, 225 .
Cited 0 timesPublished51 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.
Cited 0 timesPublished35 Tenn. 89 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Sep 15, 1855
This was an action on the case, brought by Brown & Appleton against Yancey, on the following letter of guaranty : “Jonesboro’, October 4, 1847. Messrs. Brown & Appleton : Gentlemen: Mr. W. G. … Yours, most respectfully, John Yancey.” *95 Fourteen days after the date of the above letter, Brown & Appleton, on the faith thereof, sold to Stuart a bill of goods amounting to $309.00.
Cited 0 timesPublished59 Tenn. 404 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Oct 15, 1873
Upon careful reflection, however, upon this case, we do not think it can be distinguished in principle from the case of Booker v. Booker, 5 Hum., 507 . The clause of the will thus construed was as follows. … For this the court cited Thompson v. McKissick, 3 Hum., 631 ; Davis v. Richardson, 10 Yer., 290 ; Smith v. Bell, Mar. & Yer., 302,— the well known and familiar cases in our State.
Cited 0 timesPublished22 Tenn. 135 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Jul 15, 1842
Brown, and a desire that her wants should be supplied, and that she should have a comfortable support, was read to the jury.
Cited 0 timesPublished22 Tenn. 470 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Dec 15, 1842
In 1838, Brown having obtained judgment against Massey, and caused fi-fa. to be issued thereon, filed his bill in chancery to have a certain occupant claim of Massey’s, south and west of the congressional reservation, subjected … it in Brown.
Cited 0 timesPublished22 Tenn. 470 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Dec 15, 1842
In 1838, Brown having obtained judgment against Massey, and caused fi-fa. to be issued thereon, filed his bill in chancery to have a certain occupant claim of Massey’s, south and west of the congressional reservation, subjected … it in Brown.
Cited 0 timesPublished52 Tenn. 237 · Tennessee Supreme Court · May 31, 1871
To satisfy this judgment complainants file their bill to subject a house and lot in Jackson to sale, alleging that although the title to the lot is in Matilda Brown, wife of Sam’l Brown, yet that it was paid for with money … upon the verdict of a jury, defendant Brown being represented by counsel.
Cited 0 timesPublished30 Tenn. 179 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Dec 15, 1850
This is an action of trespass brought by Brown against Walker for whipping the slave of the plaintiff. The defendant pleaded 1st.
Cited 0 timesPublished28 Tenn. 164 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Sep 15, 1848
Previous thereto Lydia was married to the complainant, Brown, and was, therefore, a feme covert, at the time her right of possession, and consequently right of action to the negroes, accrued, and no bar of these rights is … Crawford, the widow of the testator, under which will, the defendant claims to hold the negroes, by the operation of the statute of limitations, there is a clause in the words following: “ It is my will that my daughter, Lydia Brown
Cited 0 timesPublished26 Tenn. 19 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Sep 15, 1846
Harklerodo’s representations imposed upon Brown, and induced him to take these claims instead of cash, and being false, Brown was defrauded thereby. … Harklerode has no right to insist that Brown shall establish the insolvency of Sawyers by a suit.
Cited 0 timesPublished
Ask Donna