Case law

Jones v. Virginia Employment Commission

6 Va. Cir. 290 · Spotsylvania County Circuit Court · Jan 24, 1986

Fairman v. Santos

174 Misc. 2d 85 · New York Supreme Court · Aug 19, 1997

Such allegations state a cognizable claim for relief (see, Arbegast v Board of Educ., 65 NY2d 161 , 164; Vavosa v Stiles, 220 AD2d 363 ; Ochacher v Jamaica Bay Riding Academy, 202 AD2d 239 ; Panzer v Harding, 118 AD2d 842 … (See, Brown v New York City Health & Hosps. Corp., 225 AD2d 36, 44 ; Creed v United Hosp., 190 AD2d 489, 491 ; Lancellotti v Howard, 155 AD2d 588, 589-590 .)

Corcoran v. New York Central & Hudson River Railroad

20 Misc. 197 · New York Supreme Court · Apr 15, 1897

Brown, Witness. “October 22,1895.” … Vanderbilt v. Schreyer, 91 N. Y. 401 ; 2 Parsons on Contracts, 437. Seybolt v. N. Y., L. E. & W. R. R. Co., 95 N. Y. 562 , was a case where a mail agent wás killed by an accident’ on defendant’s ■road.

City of Philadelphia, Department of Revenue v. Tax Review Board ex rel. Temple University

30 Pa. D. & C.4th 248 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · Feb 13, 1996

In City of Philadelphia, Philadelphia Police Dept. v. Philadelphia Board of Licensing & Inspection Review, 669 A.2d 460 (Pa. … Philadelphia Tax Review Board, finding of fact 2. . Id. at finding of fact 3. . Philadelphia Tax Review Board, findings of fact at conclusions of law. . Insinger Machine Co. v. Philadelphia Tax Review Board, 165 Pa.

Boston Trade Bank v. Kuzon

154 Misc. 2d 217 · New York Supreme Court · Apr 22, 1992

The board of managers of the Octavia Condominium as additional defendant upon the counterclaim, in an affirmation herewith deemed for the purposes of judicial economy to be a cross motion, seeks declaratory relief, declaring … (King v Pelkofski, supra, 20 NY2d, at 333-334 ; see also, 78 NY Jur 2d, Mortgages and Deeds of Trust, § 345.)

Coon v. Syracuse & Utica Rail-Road

6 Barb. 231 · New York Supreme Court · May 1, 1849

Murray v. South Carolina R. R., 1 McMullen, 385. Brown v. Maxwell, 6 Hill, 592 .) Do the facts in the present case present the same questions ? and if not, do they present questions differing essentially in principle ? … The reasoning of Chief Justice Shaw, in Farwell v.

Morey v. Metropolitan Gas Light Co.

6 Jones & S. 185 · The Superior Court of New York City · Dec 9, 1874

The action is for a breach of a contract, and it is not entirely clear, that loss of profits can be recovered as damages in such an action (Finch v. Brown, 13 Wend. 601 ; Fitch v. … John v.

In re Lehigh Paper Mills, Inc.

5 Pa. D. & C. 112 · Northampton County Court of Quarter Sessions · Mar 10, 1924

The rule issued at the instance of the county commissioners is in effect an application to the court for an allowance of an appeal from the award of the board of viewers nunc pro tunc. In Wise v. … Chief Justice Brown held: “Where an act of assembly fixes the time within which an act must be done, as, for example, an appeal taken, courts have no power to extend it, or to allow the act to be done at a later day, as an

Harmony Township Volunteer Firemen, Inc., License

63 Pa. D. & C. 325 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Beaver County · Mar 29, 1948

Counsel for appellee cites the case of Russ v. Commonwealth, 210 Pa. 544 , as being in accord. … Justice Brown, in delivering the opinion of the Supreme Court, is significant. He said in part as follows (pp. 552, 553) : . “The failure of the learned court below to so interpret it must be regarded as error.

Canvass of Absentee Ballots of November 2, 1965, General Election

39 Pa. D. & C.2d 429 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Montgomery County · Dec 30, 1965

In the case of Perles v. … In the case of Nancy Olivia Brown, who was a student on the west coast, it was agreed that she received a defective ballot, so a second ballot was sent her.

State ex Coatney v. Horstman

71 Ohio Law. Abs. 164 · Montgomery County Court of Common Pleas · May 13, 1955

The additional reason based upon the Supreme Court decision in the census case has been decided on demurrer in State, ex rel, Graef, Jr., v. … In Sullivan v. State, 125 Oh St at page 392, the Supreme Court said: “By the repeated declarations of this court, allegations of fraud, corruption, or. abuse of discretion must be specific.”

All Saints' Episcopal Church v. Zoning Board of Adjustment of the Township of Hopewell

34 Pa. D. & C.3d 599 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Beaver County · May 10, 1985

Nor may the court substitute its judgment for that of the board unless the board has manifestly abused its discretion. Nascone v. Ross Township Zoning Hearing Board, 81 Pa. Commw. 482 , 473 A.2d 1141 (1984); Ramondo v. … Accord, Foster Grading Company v. Venango Township Zoning Hearing Board, 49 Pa. Commw. 1 , 412 A.2d 647 (1980); Susquehanna Township Board of Commissioners v.

Pancost v. State ex rel. Pancost

15 Ohio C.C. 246 · Ohio Circuit Courts · Oct 15, 1897

But, in Lockwood v. … In the case of Pretzinger v.

Cromarty v. Leonard

26 Misc. 2d 405 · New York Supreme Court · Jan 26, 1961

of Supervisors comprising 34 members (Plantz v. … Argus Co. v. Bresler, 70 App. Div. 294 , affd. 171 N. Y. 302 ; Matter of Heafy v. McCabe, 247 App. Div. 277 ).

Whitney & Bancroft v. Sterling & Hunter

14 Johns. 215 · New York Supreme Court · May 15, 1817

The bare declara *217 tions of Hunter and Sterling could not be received, to charge Brown as a partner. … Vide Drake, and Pinkney v. Elwyer and others, l Caines' Rep. 184. Whitney v Ferris, 18 Johns. Rep. 66.

In re City of New York

119 N.Y.S. 1054 · New York Supreme Court · Dec 20, 1909

The case of Burchard v. State of New York, 128 App. Div. 750 , 113 N. Y. … See County of Orange v. Ellsworth, 98 App. Div. 275 , 90 N. Y. Supp. 576 .

People ex rel King v. Gallagher

11 Abb. N. Cas. 187 · New York City Court · Jul 1, 1882

“That is,” says the court, in Board of Education v. Tennon ( 25 Alb. … In Board of Education v.

People ex rel. Woodside v. Board of Inspectors of Election of 56th Election District of Town of Hempstead

88 Misc. 2d 696 · New York Supreme Court · Nov 12, 1976

(Kramer v Union School Dist., 395 US 621 ; Phoenix v Kolodziejski, 399 US 204 ; Dunn v Blumstein, 405 US 330 ; Matter of Atkin v Onondaga County Bd. of Elections, 30 NY2d 401 .) The right to vote is fundamental. … (Matter of Conlin v Kisiel, 35 AD2d 423, aifd 28 NY2d 700 ; Matter of Starr v Meisser, 39 AD2d 712 , affd 33 NY2d 748 .) Accordingly, the court directed the board to make provision for Mr.

Faculty for Responsible Change v. Visitors of James Madison University

38 Va. Cir. 159 · Rockingham County Circuit Court · Oct 5, 1995

Cupp v. Board of Supervisors of Fairfax County, 227 Va. 580, 589 (1984). … Brown, 114 Va. 235 , 76 S.E. 295 (1912), which the Defendant relies upon for the proposition that the rights asserted by the Plaintiff derive from personal service contracts, and, therefore, may not be assigned.

Shor v. Dickey

21 Pa. D. & C. 695 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Dauphin County · Oct 3, 1934

The Commonwealth relies on Cohen v. Schofield et al., 299 Pa. 496, 502 , and Brown’s Appeal, 66 Pa. 155 ; also the Act of March 21, 1806, 4 Sm. … Brown’s Appeal, supra, is to the same effect. The Commonwealth also relies on Parkin v. New Kensington Borough, 262 Pa. 433 , Sipe v. Tarentum Borough, 263 Pa. 338 , and Whitney et al. v.