Case law

Molloy v. Board of Health

69 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 620 · New York Supreme Court · Dec 15, 1891

Brown v. New York & Erie Railroad

19 How. Pr. 84 · New York Supreme Court · Mar 15, 1860

Sigua Iron Co. v. Brown

33 Misc. 50 · New York Supreme Court · Nov 15, 1900

See Phœnix Warehousing Co. v. Badger, 67 N. Y. 299 . … See Hammond v. National Life Assn., 31 Misc. Rep. 182 . But, as we have seen, his powers under the order appointing him ancillary receiver were abundant.

Brown v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.

52 Va. Cir. 480 · Spotsylvania County Circuit Court · Jul 27, 2000

Luckett v. Jennings, 246 Va. 303 , 435 S.E.2d 400 (1993); Palumbo v. Bennett, 242 Va. 248 , 409 S.E.2d 152 (1991). … See Doss v. Jamco, 254 Va. 362 , 492 S.E.2d 441 (1997). Brown’s claim does not implicate the VHRA.

Nitzberg v. Board of Education

200 Misc. 748 · New York Supreme Court · Mar 28, 1951

Application, pursuant to article 78 of the Civil Practice Act, for an order requiring the respondent, the board of education of the city of New York, to register petitioner’s son under his true name. … Smith v. United States Casualty Co., 197 N. Y. 420 .

Erie & Jersey Railroad v. Brown

57 Misc. 164 · New York Supreme Court · Dec 15, 1907

Hence the allegation of the petition as to the incorporation of the plaintiff stands admitted, while the proof of the granting by the Board of Railroad Commissioners of the certificate, under section 59 of the Railroad Law … Co. v. New York, West Shore & Buffalo R. R. Co., 11 Abb. N. C. 386 . That decision was under section 22 of chapter 140 of the Laws of 1850, which section has been repealed, and entirely rewritten.

Brown v. Allied Plumbing & Heating Co.

20 N.J. Misc. 311 · Court of Common Pleas of New Jersey · Jul 1, 1942

McDonough v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 127 N. J. L. 158; 21 Atl. Rep. (2d) 314. This is the English rule, cited in McDonough v. … Bryant v. Fissell, 84 N. J. L. 72; 86 Atl. Rep. 458 .

Board of Health v. Valentine

11 N.Y.S. 112 · New York Supreme Court · Jul 18, 1890

It seems too plain for argument that this action was well brought in the name of the board, without naming the individual members thereof Board v. Casey, 3 N. Y. Supp. 399 . The case Gould v. City of Rochester, 12 N. E. … Moody v. Mayor, 43 Barb. 282 ; Cheetham v. Hampson, 4 Term R. 318; Rosewell v. Prior, 2 Salk. 460, fully reported in 1 Ld. Raym. 392,713.

Penny v. Board of Supervisors

53 Pa. D. & C.2d 329 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Bucks County · Sep 3, 1971

Articles IX and X are concerned generally with appeals only in zoning matters, to the board and to the court respectively; section 911 extends the board’s jurisdiction, at least to a limited degree, to proceedings challenging … As noted by the Commonwealth Court in Morelli v. Borough of St. Marys, 1 Comm.

Girardi v. E. M. Brown, Inc.

14 Pa. D. & C.3d 290 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Clearfield County · Dec 11, 1979

The primary case dealing with this issue is Harrisburg National Bank v. Ohio Casualty Insurance Co., 28 D. & C. 2d 620 (1962), wherein a pro-thonotary delayed 41 days in issuing a writ after a praecipe had been filed.

Shilbury v. Board of Supervisors

54 Misc. 2d 979 · New York Supreme Court · Aug 25, 1967

In lannucci v. Board of Supervisors of Washington County and Saratogian, Inc. v. … Vaughan v. Supervisors, 52 Hun 446 , affd. 119 N. Y. 636 ; Peoples. Hagadorn, 36 Hun 610 , affd. 104 N. Y. 516, 522 ; People v. Supervisors of St. Lawrence County, 25 Hun 131 , 133-134; Brown v. Ward, 216 N. Y.

Armitage v. Board of Education

122 Misc. 586 · New York Supreme Court · Mar 15, 1924

Williams v. Dayton, 55 id. 367; Greenwald v. Weir, 130 App. Div. 696, 701 ; *591 affd., 199 N. Y. 170 ; Matter of Board of Street Opening, 12 Misc. Rep. 526 ; affd., 91 Hun, 477 ; affd., 149 N. Y. 575 ; Chicago v. … Const. § 474; State Board of Tax Commissioners v. Holliday, 150 Ind. 216 ; Price v. Lancaster County, 189 Penn. St. 95.

Cleveland A. & C. Ry. v. Brown

33 Ohio C.C. Dec. 243 · Summit Circuit Court · Apr 21, 1905

Substituting the name “Brown” for “Jenkins” the same interrogatory was submitted to the jury in the present case, and this was answered in these words: “We can not tell.” … Here the jury were unable to say that the engine crew did not use all reasonable care to prevent the accident after they knew of Brown’s danger, and Brown was not entitled to recover on account of the negligence of the crew

State ex rel. Votava v. Brown

20 Ohio C.C. Dec. 422 · Cuyahoga Circuit Court · May 5, 1908

State v. Constable, 7 Ohio (pt. 1) 7. Bushnell v. Koon, 28 O. C. C. 367. … State v. Pattison, 73 Ohio St. 305 [76 N. E. Rep. 946].

Brown, Russell & Russell v. Spear & Butler

5 How. Pr. 146 · New York Supreme Court · Jul 15, 1850

Brown v. Connecticut Mutual Life Insurance

6 Ohio C.C. 62 · Ohio Circuit Courts · Oct 15, 1891

an order of sale is an execution, it is included in section 5416, and the remedies therein provided apply to orders of sale as well as to executions at law, and in support of this position counsel cite the case of Bell v. … Hence the case of Bell v. Duduit does not support the claim made by counsel for defendant in error.

Ohio State Journal Co. v. Brown

19 Ohio C.C. 325 · Ohio Circuit Courts · Jan 15, 1900

State ex rel. Kessler v. Brown

8 Ohio C.C. 103 · Ohio Circuit Courts · Jan 15, 1894

If he refuses to do so and returns it to the board with his objections, it is then to be considered by the board again, and if approved by the votes of four-fifths of all the members elected to the board, it shall then take … , instead of the votes of two-thirds of the members of each board, as it was before.

Brown v. Connecticut Mutual Life Ins.

3 Ohio Cir. Dec. 350 · Hancock Circuit Court · Oct 15, 1891

as an order of sale is an execution, it is included in sec. 5416, and the remedies therein provided apply to orders of sale as well as to executions at law, and in support of this position counsel cite the case of Bell v. … Hence the case of Bell v.

Ernst v. Brown Hoisting & Conveying Co.

24 N.Y.S. 359 · The Superior Court of the City of New York and Buffalo · Jul 14, 1893

Brown, John Trotter, and De Wilton Skinner. … The substance of the evidence as to the soundness of this particular structure is as follows: Brown says: “These same caps had been used in two previous places before shipping here,—part of it in Ashtabula harbor and part