Case law

Brown v. Brown

666 S.E.2d 217 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Sep 16, 2008

State v. Holt

119 Wash. App. 712 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jan 13, 2004

State v. … State v.

Brown v. Brown

10 Or. App. 80 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · May 26, 1972

Brown to intervene in a divorce suit between plaintiff, Add H. Brown, and defendant, James H. Brown. Petitioner is the defendant’s mother. … In Barendrecht v. Clark, 244 Or 524, 528 , 419 P2d 603 (1966), the Oregon Supreme Court stated: “* * * Read literally, this section [ORS 13.-130] permits intervention only before the trial. However, in Duke v.

Brown v. Brown

257 S.W.3d 616 · Missouri Court of Appeals · May 20, 2008

ORDER PER CURIAM: Johnny Jack Brown appeals the circuit court’s judgment modifying the custody arrangement for his son from joint physical custody to sole physical custody to his *617 ex-wife, Angela Elane Brown.

Brown v. Brown

280 S.W. 918 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Mar 1, 1926

Brown, filed this suit in one of the district courts of Jefferson county against the appellant, Noah Brown, in trepass to try title to recover the title and possession of lots 1 and 2 in block 4, and lots 24 and 25 in block … to appellant, Noah Brown, purporting to convey to the latter said lot No. 2.

Brown v. Brown

654 S.E.2d 832 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jan 15, 2008

Brown v. Brown

122 A.D. 576 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 13, 1907

Brown, the widow of the decedent, as trustee of an express trust, she being a beneficiary, was valid. The firm, name of the copartnership was Brown & Seccomb. … Brown and "William Harold Brown in the said firm, except their special capital contributed as aforesaid, and any increase and interest due thereupon, shall cease.”

Brown v. Brown

143 A.D.2d 248 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Aug 29, 1988

Although the right of recovery for the alleged improper actions of the plaintiff belongs to the corporation, the claims can be brought in the defendant Leila Brown’s name (see, e.g., Bertoni v Catucci, 117 AD2d 892 ; Conant … v Schnall, 33 AD2d 326 ).

Brown v. Brown

177 Cal. App. 2d 387 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 25, 1960

Defendant husband appeals from an interlocutory judgment of divorce rendered in favor of plaintiff-respondent Erma Marie Brown. … (Leupe v. Leupe, 21 Cal. 2d 145 , 147 et seq. [ 130 P.2d 697 ]. See also Gould v. Superior Court, 47 Cal.App. 197, 200 [ 191 P. 56 ]; Abbott v. Superior Court, supra; Klebora v.

DeSouza-Brown v. Brown

38 A.D.3d 888 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 27, 2007

Rochester, 26 AD3d 387, 388 [2006]; Matter of Kravitz v Kravitz, 18 AD3d 874, 875 [2005]; Matter of Zieran v Marvin, 2 AD3d 870, 872 [2003]; Matter of Cutrone v Cutrone, 225 AD2d 767, 768 [1996]). … v Laland, 4 AD3d 529, 530 [2004]; Matter of Topper v Topper, 271 AD2d 613 [2000]).

Brown v. Brown

24 N.J. Super. 198 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 5, 1953

BROWN, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. EDWARD I. BROWN, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division. Argued November 3, 1952. Decided January 5, 1953. *200 Before Judges McGEEHAN, JAYNE and CONLON. … Perlman v. Perlman , above; Kempson v. Kempson, 61 N.J. Eq. 303, 311 .

Brown v. Brown

984 So. 2d 1251 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Jun 30, 2008

984 So.2d 1251 (2008) BROWN v. BROWN. No. 1D07-6589. District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District. June 30, 2008. Decision without published opinion. Affirmed.

Brown v. Brown

120 S.W.2d 850 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Oct 13, 1938

By cross action the defendant, Ernest Brown, also sought divorce and prayed for conformation of an alleged agreement partitioning the community property. … Daniel v. Daniel, Tex.Civ.App., 16 S.W.2d 303 , and cases cited. The judgment of the trial court is reversed and the cause remanded for a new trial. , Reversed and remanded.

Brown v. Brown

174 P.3d 459 · Court of Appeals of Kansas · Jan 11, 2008

174 P.3d 459 (2008) BROWN v. BROWN. No. 97852. Court of Appeals of Kansas. January 11, 2008. Decision without published opinion. Affirmed.

Brown v. Brown

797 So. 2d 253 · Court of Appeals of Mississippi · Jan 16, 2001

797 So.2d 253 (2001) Donna Ragland BROWN, Appellant v. Charles Wayne BROWN, Appellee. No. 1999-CA-01741-COA. Court of Appeals of Mississippi. January 16, 2001. *254 Sharon Patterson Thibodeaux, Attorney for Appellant. … See also Brown, 574 So.2d at 690; Brendel v. Brendel, 566 So.2d 1269, 1273 (Miss.1990); Jones v. Jones, 532 So.2d 574, 580-81 (Miss.1988); Regan v. Regan, 507 So.2d 54, 56 (Miss.1987); Watts v.

Pavonarius v. City of Allentown

157 Pa. Commw. 116 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 13, 1993

Atlantic-Inland, Inc. v. The Board of Supervisors of West Goshen Township, 48 Pa.Commonwealth Ct. 397, 410 A.2d 380 (1980). … Gough v. Borough of Norristown, 66 Pa.Commonwealth Ct. 401, 444 A.2d 839 (1982). See also McCorkle v. Bellefonte Area Board of School Directors, 41 Pa.Commonwealth Ct. 681, 401 A.2d 371 (1979); Fair v.

Brown v. Brown

10 Ark. App. 251 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Jan 18, 1984

Brown, and appellee, Kathey M. Brown, were divorced on December 5, 1979, by decree of the chancery court of Union County, Arkansas.

Brown v. Brown

125 Cal. App. 429 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 22, 1932

Brown to his son, A. F. Brown. … In Dye v.

State v. Fleming

247 N.C. App. 812 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jun 7, 2016

State v. Stewart, 231 N.C. App. 134, 141, 750 S.E.2d 875, 880 (2013) (citation omitted). See also State v. Billings, 104 N.C. … See also Abels v. Renfro Corp., 126 N.C.

Brown v. Brown

236 A.D.2d 611 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Feb 24, 1997

. *612 Although this Court’s authority is as broad as that of the trial court in custody matters (see, Young v Young, 212 AD2d 114, 117 ; Matter of Rosiana C. v Pierre S., 191 AD2d 432, 433 ), the general rule is that custody … for the hearing court, the determination of which is based upon a "firsthand assessment of the parties, their credibility, their character, and temperaments”, and should be accorded great deference (Matter of Krebsbach v