Case law

State v. Brown

34 Tex. 146 · Texas Supreme Court · Jul 1, 1871

Brown, had departed this life previous to the rendition of the judgment nisi. This allegation was not sworn to, and so far as the record shows there was no proof before the court of the death of the defendant Brown.

Brown v. Renfro

63 Tex. 600 · Texas Supreme Court · Feb 6, 1885

Brown v. State

16 Tex. 122 · Texas Supreme Court · Jul 1, 1856

Draughn v. Brown

26 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 293 · Texas Supreme Court · Mar 23, 1983

In Eades v. … V, § 6. Chief Justices Brown’s and Evans’ attempts to comply with the statutes and draw lots for terms of office will conflict with the holding in Eades v. Drake, supra.

Brown v. Horless

22 Tex. 645 · Texas Supreme Court · Jul 1, 1859

Brown v. Pfouts

53 Tex. 221 · Texas Supreme Court · Jun 15, 1880

Egery v. Power, 5 Tex., 501 ; Bradford v. Hamilton, 7 Tex., 57 ; R S., art. 1260. … Foster v. Martin, 20 Tex., 118 ; Cook v. Steel, 42 Tex., 56 .

Brown v. McConnell

56 Tex. 229 · Texas Supreme Court · Feb 7, 1882

In the well-considered case of Giddings v. … Taylor v. Adams, 2 Serg. & R, 534.

Carter v. Brown

107 Tex. 539 · Texas Supreme Court · Jan 5, 1916

Thompson v. Keys, 162 S. W., 1196 . Thereupon Brown, by amended pleading, sought a recovery in damages against Carter on account of his alleged fraud for an amount less than $1,000. He obtained a judgment for $359.56. … This jurisdiction question was presented and ruled upon in Brown v. Cates, 99 Texas, 133 , 87 S.

Fowler v. Brown

5 Tex. 407 · Texas Supreme Court · Dec 15, 1849

Brown v. Robison

118 Tex. 484 · Texas Supreme Court · Jun 5, 1929

The question arising on said motion is essentially the same as that involved in the motion to dismiss the case of Guenther v. Robison, this day decided. The holding in that case controls the disposition of this motion.

Harrison v. Brown

11 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 68 · Texas Supreme Court · Nov 8, 1967

Flores v. De Garza, 44 S.W.2d 909 (Tex.Com.App.1932, judg. adopted) ; 5 Bowe-Parker, Page on Wills, §§ 44:15, 44:16, 44:17 (1962); Restatement, Property, § 269 (1940). … Federal Land Bank of Houston v. Little, 130 Tex. 173 , 107 S.W.2d 374 (1937); St. Paul’s Sanitarium v. Freeman, 102 Tex. 376 , 117 S.W. 425 (1909).

Brown v. State

34 Tex. 525 · Texas Supreme Court · Jul 1, 1871

Edelstein v. J.M. Brown

100 Tex. 403 · Texas Supreme Court · Mar 6, 1907

BROWN, Associate Justice. J. M. and L. B. Brown instituted this action in the District Court of Camp County, in which they alleged that they were the children and only heirs of Mrs. … (McCampbell v. Henderson, 50 Texas, 601 ; Parks v. Caudle, 58 Texas, 221 ; Bartlingck v. Harriman, 41 S. W. Rep., 884 ; Johnson v. Lockhart, 40 S. W. Rep., 640 ; Hazlewood v. Pennybacker, 50 S. W. Rep., 199 ; Abbott v.

Graham v. McCarty & Brown

69 Tex. 323 · Texas Supreme Court · Dec 13, 1887

After answering by general and special demurrer, and general denial, appellees filed a plea in abatement to the jurisdiction of the court, to which appellee Brown made the following affidavit: “That the facts set forth in … (Wilson v. Adams, 15 Texas, 324 .) We think the court erred in the rulings here complained.! of.

Pratt v. Brown, Receiver

80 Tex. 608 · Texas Supreme Court · Apr 28, 1891

Giroux v. The State, 40 Texas, 104, 105 . … In the case of Scircle v.

Cothran v. Marmaduke & Brown

60 Tex. 370 · Texas Supreme Court · Nov 23, 1883

Owens v. Mackall, 33 Md., 382 ; Parker v. Canfield, 37 Conn., 250 ; Eastman v. Clark, 53 27. H., 276; Leggett v. Hyde, 58 N. Y., 272 . … Sheridan v. Medora, 10 N. J. Eq., 469; Lengle v. Smith, 48 Mo., 276 .

Brown v. State

32 Tex. 124 · Texas Supreme Court · Jul 1, 1869

Johnson v. Brown

25 Tex. 120 · Texas Supreme Court · Oct 15, 1860

The defense is supposed to be warranted by the decision of this court in the case of Swenson v. "Walker’s Administrator, ( 3 Tex., 93 .) That case, however, is plainly distinguishable from the present.

Brown v. State

29 Tex. 503 · Texas Supreme Court · Jul 1, 1861

Brown v. Robison

103 Tex. 551 · Texas Supreme Court · Nov 9, 1910

Justice Brown delivered the opinion of the court. Mrs. Brown, a married woman, who is joined, pro forma, by her husband, J. E. … Brown, had, before the time of the filing of her application, purchased from the State 120 acres of the same class of land and that the said Brown had not expended on the said land as much as $5,000.00, wherefore, respondent