Case law

Ernest v. State

162 Tenn. 247 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Mar 16, 1931

All fines assessed for the violation of anv *251 of the provisions of this Ant shall he placed in the hands of the Secretary and Treasurer of the Board of Pharmacy to meet the necessary and legitimate expenses of said Board … In State v.

Frazier v. State

303 S.W.3d 674 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Feb 18, 2010

People v. … .”); Brown v.

Sypert v. Frazier

1 Shan. Cas. 557 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Jan 15, 1876

[Finley v. King], 1 Head, 123 ; [Pigg v. Sparrow], 3 Hay., 144 . … [Brown v. McDonald], 8 Yer., 160 .

Cowan v. State

208 Tenn. 512 · Tennessee Supreme Court · May 26, 1961

In the New York case of People v. … v.

Carothers v. Shelby County

148 Tenn. 185 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Apr 15, 1922

Plaintiff in error sued Shelby county and its officers, the county board of commissioners, to recover damages for the death of her husband. … White’s Creek Turnpike Co. v. Davidson County, 84 Tenn., 24 ; Wood v. Tipton County, 7 Baxt., 112 , 32 Am. Rep., 561 ; Williams v. Taxing District, 16 Lea, 531 ; McAndrews v. Hamilton County, 105 Tenn., 400 , 58 S.

Boggers v. Boggers

65 Tenn. 299 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Sep 15, 1873

The principle decided in Chenault v. … Chenault, 5 Sneed, is certainly correct; that is, that where the divorce is only from bed and board, the marriage relation still subsists, and the husband is still bound to maintain his wife, and this duty the court may from

Smith v. Smith

518 S.W.2d 510 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Jan 6, 1975

Delta Loan & Finance Company v. Long, 206 Tenn. 709 , 336 S.W.2d 5 , 337 S.W.2d 606 (1960); Chamberlain v. State ex rel. Brown, 215 Tenn. 565 , 387 S.W.2d 816 (1965).

Evans v. Young

201 Tenn. 368 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Feb 8, 1957

In Finley v. *372 Brown, 122 Tenn. 316 , 123 S.W. 359 , 362, 25 L.R.A., N.S., 1285, this Court declared the applicable law here to he applied as follows: “There is no doubt whatever, under the authorities in this country, … In Smith v. Mitchell, supra, this Court again recognized and properly so the statement heretofore quoted *379 from Finley v. Brown, supra. This Court said in Smith v.

Trau-Med of America, Inc. v. Allstate Insurance Co.

71 S.W.3d 691 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Mar 25, 2002

In Hutton, the defendant, the president of a boarding school, became angry with the plaintiff, a boarding house owner and operator, over her refusal to dismiss one of her boarders. … See Brown v. Birman Managed Care, Inc., 42 S.W.3d 62, 67 (Tenn.2001) (citing Dale v. Thomas H. Temple Co., 186 Tenn. 69, 87 , 208 S.W.2d 344, 353 (1948)).

State ex rel. Conger v. Madison County

581 S.W.2d 632 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Mar 26, 1979

Davidson County Board of Education v. … Cope v.

Sharp v. State

102 Tenn. 9 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Jan 14, 1899

Sinnott v. State, 11 Lea, 281 ; Harwell v. State, 10 Lea, 541 ; New Orleans v. Steamship Co., 20 Wall., 387 -392; Fisher v. Hayes, 6 Fed. Rep., 64; 3 Am. & Eng. Enc. L., 796. … It appeared in that case that Hickey had been *13 sentenced to fine and imprisonment for contempt of the Circuit Court at Yicksburg, and was pardoned by Governor Albert Gallatin Brown.

Guzman v. Alvares

205 S.W.3d 375 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Jul 11, 2006

See Gordon v. Pollard, 207 Tenn. 45 , 336 S.W.2d 25, 27 (1960) (recognizing that a marriage prohibited by statute is void “as if it had never been”); Brown v. … Brown, 29 S.W.3d 491, 494-95 (Tenn.Ct.App.2000) (classifying marriages prohibited by law as void from the beginning).

F. Lane & Co. v. Bank of West Tennessee

56 Tenn. 419 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Apr 15, 1872

Brown, 1 Term R., 167, where his perseverance compelled them to submit to the doctrine of requiring “immediate notice." … Notes, Sec. 244; Smith v. Rockwell, 2 Hill, N. Y., 482; Apperson v. Union Bank, 4 Col., 446 . And mere personal knowledge by the indorser will not dispense with notice. Alton v. Robinson, 2 Hum., 341 ; Esdaile v.

United Inter-Mountain Telephone Co. v. Public Service Commission

555 S.W.2d 389 · Tennessee Supreme Court · May 23, 1977

The legislative intent that this act apply to all administrative boards and agencies is unmistakably clear. … Upon the authority of that case and of Federal Power Commission v.

Jerry Neal Carpenter v. State of Tennessee - Concurring

Tennessee Supreme Court · Jan 13, 2004

First, there is no indication in Brown that the law actually was in a state of great disarray. … The strongest words used in the Brown decision were "blurred" and "muddled".

Boles v. Smith

1 Thompson 214 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Dec 15, 1859

Brown v. Johnson, 1 Humph. 161 ; Jones v. Perry, 10 Yerg. 59 ; Ross v. Cobb, 9 Yerg. 463 , 471; Ellicott v. Pearl, 10 Peters, 412, 443 ; Barr v. Gratz, Heirs, 4 Wheat. 213, 222, 223 ; Fox v. … Napier v. Simpson, 1 Tenn. 248 ; Kelly v. Hass. 1 Humph. 163 ; Mitchell v. Churchman, 4 Humph. 218 ; Waddell v. Stewart, 4 Sneed, 434 ; Tighlman v Baird, 2 Sneed, 196 .

Doug Satterfield v. Breeding Insulation Company

266 S.W.3d 347 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Sep 9, 2008

Biscan v. Brown, 160 S.W.3d at 478-79 ; Bradshaw v. … Hale v. Ostrow, 166 S.W.3d at 716-17 ; Biscan v. Brown, 160 S.W.3d at 480 .

State Ex Rel. Maner v. Leech

588 S.W.2d 534 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Oct 9, 1979

V. … The first three paragraphs of Section 5-551(b) read as follows: County Board of Commissioners in Knox County.

Abbott v. Fagg

48 Tenn. 742 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Sep 15, 1870

The rea *747 soning of the Court, in Gill v. Greed, 3 Cold., 297 , unquestionably sustains this proposition; hut that case was brought up by writ of error, and not by appeal. That opinion is supported by Delap v. … This question has been also considered, at the present term, in the cases of Mathes v. Meek & Simpson, † and Harrison & Brothers v. Farnsworth, ‡ and its further discussion is not demanded by the facts of this case.

Evans v. Thompson

59 Tenn. 534 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Oct 15, 1873

In Brown’s Com. on Com. … McCandless v. Polk, 10 Hum., 617 ; Stovall v. Bowers, Ib. 560. The judgment is reversed and the case remanded.