Case law

Brown v. Carr

503 A.2d 1241 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jan 22, 1986

The behavior objected to by Carr included oral and written statements made by Brown and his attorney before the Transportation Committee, the Board of Zoning Adjustment (BZA), and the Advisory Neighborhood Commission for … Indeed, as noted above, the decision of this court in Carr v. Brown, left open the possibility that Brown had acted maliciously.

Brown v. State

105 Tex. Crim. 586 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Jun 2, 1926

Brown v. McAdoo

195 Iowa 286 · Supreme Court of Iowa · May 9, 1922

Bussler v. Chicago, M. & St. P. R. Co., 165 Iowa 361 ; Ames v. Waterloo & C. F. R. T. Co., 120 Iowa 640 ; Thompson v. Chicago G. W. R. Co., 162 Iowa 468 ; Golinvaux v. Burlington, C. R. & N. R. Co., 125 Iowa 652 . … Beemer v. Chicago, R. I. & P. R. Co., 181 Iowa 642 ; Morris v. Chicago, B. & Q. R. Co., 101 Neb. 479 ( 163 N. W. 799 ); Brommer v. Pennsylvania R. Co., 179 Fed. 577 ; Howe v. Corey, 172 Wis. 537 ( 179 N.

Wright v. . Brown

116 N.C. 26 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Feb 5, 1895

It has been held, as far back as McDonald v. McDonald, 5 Jones Eq., 211 , followed by the cases of Masten v. Marlow, 65 N. C., 695 , Bodenhamer v. Welch, 89 N. … The second taker is fixed by the will, which makes this ease stronger for the defendant Brown than that case was for the defendant Hackett. Tbe case of Starnes v. Hill, 112 N.

State v. Brown

206 Mo. 501 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Jul 13, 1907

[Bollinger v. Carrier, 79 Mo. 318 ; St. Louis v. Boyce, 130 Mo. 572 ; Jackson v. Ferguson, 76 Mo. App. 270 ; Turney v. Ewins, 97 Mo. App. 620 ; Crossland v. Admire, 149 Mo. 650 ; Hill v. Combs, 92 Mo. App. 242 .] … “The presumption is that the Legislature never intended to enact an absurd law incapable of being intelligibly enforced. ’ ’ [Bingham v. Birmingham, 103 Mo. l. c. 352; Railroad v. Brick Co., 85 Mo. 307 ; State v.

Christner v. Brown

16 Iowa 130 · Supreme Court of Iowa · Apr 20, 1864

See also Carpenter v. King, 9 Met., 511 ; Harris v. Brooks, 21 Pick., 195 ; Grafton Bank v. Kent, 4 N. H., Rep., 221. … Cas., 4th ed., 418; Grafton Bank v. Woodward, 5 N. H., 99 ; Bailey v. Adams, 10 Id., 162; The New Hampshire Savings Bank v. Ela, 11 Id., 335; The Lime Bank v. Millett, 34 Maine, 547; Fowler v.

Brown v. Wallis

115 Mass. 156 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Jun 16, 1874

Guthrie v. Jones, 108 Mass. 191 . Niblet v. Smith, 4 T. R. 504. Cresson v. Stout, 17 Johns. 116 . Exceptions overruled.

Brown v. Steele

23 Kan. 672 · Supreme Court of Kansas · Jan 15, 1880

That the question of the continuance of the tribal organization is one for the 'decision of the political department of the government, is also affirmed in United States v. Holliday, 3 Wall. 419 , where Mr. … Co. v. Morris, 13 Kas. 315 .)

Davis v. Brown

406 P.3d 251 · Utah Supreme Court · Oct 14, 2017

Thompson v. Brown

121 Ga. 814 · Supreme Court of Georgia · Jan 28, 1905

Benjamin v. Benjamin, 15 Conn. 347 , 39 Am. Dec. 384 . 2. … Law (2d ed.) 1188; Blount v. Dugger, 115 Ga. 109 . Judgment reversed. All the Justices concur. The verdict was in favor of the plaintiff. The defendant moved for a new trial, which was denied, and he excepted.

Orr v. Brown

5 Ga. 400 · Supreme Court of Georgia · Aug 15, 1848

The only charge which implicates Brown, the purchaser at sheriff’s sale, is that he “ threw doubts upon the title of the defendant in execution.” What did he do at the sale? … There is no issuable fact, charged by the complainant, in relation to the conduct of Brown at the sale.

Brown v. Troup

33 Miss. 35 · Mississippi Supreme Court · Apr 15, 1857

Brown, from proceeding to sell certain property under a deed of trust executed by the complainant, to secure the payment of a debt by him owing to one John Ezell, on the ground that Brown was indebted in a large sum to one … The bill alleges that the balance due upon the note held by Brown was about $1300, and that the complainant had recovered a judgment against William Ezell, to whom Brown was alleged to be indebted several thousand dollars

Brown v. McAlister

34 Ind. 375 · Indiana Supreme Court · Nov 15, 1870

.: “ That on the day of the date of the instrument, said Oc *376 tavia E. brought the same to the office of Brown, Dunkerson & Co., Evansville, and folding the paper on which said instrument was written, so as to conceal … the whole of the writing thereon, said to William Brown and Robert K.

Brown v. Commonwealth

89 Va. 379 · Supreme Court of Virginia · Nov 10, 1892

It is dated October 26th, 1889, and it is headed, “ To the Council of Rocky Mount, Va., of the latties news of Brown case.” … Whereas, at the date specified and heading the paper, there was no such case as the “ Brown case.”

Brown v. Brown

89 W. Va. 339 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Oct 25, 1921

Brown, under the provisions of the will, received a tract of land containing several hundred acres. The plaintiff C. L. Brown was assigned a like tract of land adjoining that of E. W. Brown, and the other brother, W-. … Hall v. The Bank of Virginia, 14 W. Va. 584 ; 3 C. J. 656. E. W. Brown has just as much interest in the subject matter here as tbe trustee in such a deed of trust.

Brown v. Maher

68 Ind. 14 · Indiana Supreme Court · Nov 15, 1879

Brown, the plaintiff', appears to have owned the land before the sale thereof, hereinafter mentioned. … See the ease of Hatfield v. Jackson, 50 Ind. 507 , and authorities there cited. The appellant claims that the defendant could not avail himself of the statute of limitations, inasmuch as it was not pleaded.

Brown v. Lanman

1 Conn. 467 · Supreme Court of Connecticut · Jun 15, 1816

Spain v. Brown

236 N.C. 355 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Oct 29, 1952

Truelove v. R. R., 222 N.C. 704 , 24 S.E. 2d 537 ; Brown v. Hall, 226 N.C. 732 , 40 S.E. 2d 412 . The only pleading on the part of the defendant is either a demurrer or an answer. G-.S. 1-124. … The rule which prohibits the incorporation of extraneous, evidential, irrelevant, impertinent, or scandalous matter in a complaint or answer, G.S. 1-153; Brown v. Hall, supra; Truelove v. R. R., supra; Parlier v.

People v. Brown

17 N.Y.3d 863 · New York Court of Appeals · Oct 13, 2011

facts in a light most favorable to the People, there is a valid line of reasoning and permissible inferences from which a rational jury could have found the elements of the crime proved beyond a reasonable doubt” (People v … of the evidence at the Appellate Division and the order of that court “ ‘manifests] a lack of application of that review power’ ... we must reverse and remit for a proper assessment of the weight of the evidence” (People v

Brown v. Roberts

309 Or. 667 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 20, 1990

Petitioners Brown and Peach did not file with the Secretary of State comments and arguments concerning the Attorney General’s draft ballot title. We, therefore, dismiss their petitions for review.