Case law

Brown v. Majors

7 Wend. 495 · New York Supreme Court · May 15, 1831

The plaintiff’s counsel contends that this case is similar in principle to Hubbell v. Rochester, 8 Cowen, 115, and Buck v. Aikin, 1 Wendell, 466 .

People v. Brown

196 A.D.2d 428 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Aug 12, 1993

Brown—does the evidence show that Mr. Brown sold a drug, to wit, cocaine to a police officer? "How can you do that? … (People v Feldman, 50 NY2d 500, 504 .) The question remaining is whether the constructive amendment of the indictment prejudiced defendant.

People v. Brown

91 A.D.2d 615 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 6, 1982

(Code of Criminal Procedure, § 393; Ruloff v. People, 45 N. Y. 213 ; People v. Rose, 52 Hun, 33 ; People v. Ryan, 120 App. Div. 275 ; People v. Friedman, 149 App. Div. 873, 878 .)” … (People v Watson, 216 NY 565, 568-569 .)

Stokes v. Brown

2 A.D.3d 1373 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 31, 2003

Defendant failed to demonstrate that Gail suffered only “a mild, minor or slight limitation of use” (King v Johnston, 211 AD2d 907, 907 [1995], citing Gaddy v Eyler, 79 NY2d 955, 957 [1992]; see Anderson v Persell, 272 AD2d … Ctr., 64 NY2d 851, 853 [1985]; see Gray v Lasurdo, 302 AD2d 560 [2003]).

People v. Brown

112 A.D.2d 1087 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Aug 26, 1985

People v Smith, 47 NY2d 83 ; People v Pellot, 105 AD2d 223 ). … P., Bracken, Brown and Lawrence, JJ., concur.

People v. Brown

169 A.D.2d 773 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jan 22, 1991

Counsel’s application for leave to withdraw as counsel is granted (see, Anders v California, 386 US 738 ; People v Paige, 54 AD2d 631 ; cf., People v Gonzalez, 47 NY2d 606 ). Bracken, J.

People v. Brown

84 A.D.3d 1262 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 24, 2011

Contrary to the People’s contention, the defendant’s status as a reincarcerated parole violator did not render him ineligible to *1263 apply for resentencing pursuant to CPL 440.46 (see People v Johnson, 83 AD3d 734 [2d Dept … 2011]; People v Phillips, 82 AD3d 1011 [2011], lv granted 16 NY3d 834 [2011]).

People v. Brown

114 A.D.2d 1036 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 25, 1985

636 ; People v Warren, 47 NY2d 740 ). … v Alford, supra, at p 31).

Dufour v. Brown

66 A.D.3d 1217 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Oct 22, 2009

v Howes, 259 AD2d 895, 896 [1999]; Belyski v Pedone, 240 AD2d 608, 609 [1997]; Duval v Barnaby, 75 App Div 154, 156 [1902]). … Zwinge v Love, 37 AD2d 874 [1971]).

People v. Brown

23 A.D.3d 702 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 3, 2005

However, defendant must plead supporting evidentiary facts, as conclusory allegations of ultimate facts are insufficient (see People v Session, 34 NY2d 254, 255-256 [1974]; People v Baptiste, 306 AD2d 562, 569 [2003], lv … Demetsenare, 14 AD3d 792, 795 [2005]; People v Kalteux, 2 AD3d 967, 968 [2003]).

People v. Brown

262 A.D.2d 570 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 21, 1999

NY2d 944 ; People v De Jesus, 42 NY2d 519 ; People v Hinton, 31 NY2d 71 , cert denied 410 US 911 ; People v Foster, 211 AD2d 640 ). … Brown, 78 NY2d 874 ; People v Bolden, 58 NY2d 741 ; People v Johnson, 224 AD2d 635 ; People v Mahone, 206 AD2d 263 ; People v Howard, 193 AD2d 620 ).

People v. Brown

64 A.D.3d 611 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 7, 2009

Oliver, 63 NY2d 973, 975 [1984]; Matter of Dowsett v Dowsett, 172 AD2d 610, 611 [1991]). … The sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80 [1982]). Rivera, J.P, Dillon, Balkin and Austin, JJ., concur.

Brown v. Goord

19 A.D.3d 773 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 9, 2005

Petitioner is currently incarcerated following his conviction of various crimes, including the assault of a woman (People v Brown, 287 AD2d 341 [2001], lv denied 97 NY2d 702 [2002]). … Given the “unique facts of this case” (Matter of Brown v New York City Police Dept., supra at 561), the reliance on the presentence report as a basis for refusing to expunge the misinformation in petitioner’s guidance file

Brown v. Richter

25 A.D. 239 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jan 15, 1898

Brown and her brother and sister (Brown v. Richter, 76 Hun, 469 ; 144 N. … Such' was Van Kleeck v.

Scheker v. Brown

91 A.D.3d 751 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jan 17, 2012

Sys., 98 NY2d 345 [2002]; Gaddy v Eyler, 79 NY2d 955, 956-957 [1992]). … 813 [1991]; Lively v Fernandez, 85 AD3d 981 [2011]; Pierson v Edwards, 77 AD3d 642 [2010]; Vasquez v John Doe #1, 73 AD3d 1033 [2010]).

People v. Brown

135 A.D.3d 605 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jan 26, 2016

31 NY2d 877 [1972]; see also People v Barden, 117 AD3d 216, 232-235 [1st Dept 2014], lv granted 24 NY2d 959 [2014]). … The sentence was properly enhanced for defendant’s failure to comply with a condition unambiguously set forth by the court (see People v Cataldo, 39 NY2d 578, 580 [1976]; People v Baptiste, 116 AD3d 588 [1st Dept 2014], lv

People v. Brown

138 A.D.3d 420 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Apr 5, 2016

Wood v. Brown

26 A.D.3d 390 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Feb 14, 2006

the hearing, and his consent to the order of protection, all clearly precluded his subsequent claim that he had not been served with notice of the mother’s petition (see Family Ct Act § 167; see also Matter of Borggreen v … Borggreen, 13 AD3d 756, 757 [2004]; Matter of Fallon v Fallon, 4 AD3d 426, 427 [2004]; Matter of Brozzo v Brozzo, 192 AD2d 878, 879-880 [1993]).

People v. Brown

79 A.D.2d 659 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 15, 1980

Since it is, per se, reversible error to close a trial to the public without a factual showing of compelling necessity (People v Jones, 47 NY2d 409 ), and since no such showing was made herein, the judgment rendered against

Brown v. Ashbough

40 How. Pr. 226 · New York Supreme Court · Nov 15, 1870

The defendant's brother, Roderick L, Ashbough, makes an affidavit in relation to the $1,000 mentioned in Brown's affidavit, as a sum, which defendant said to "Brown, his brother was to let him have. … Brown says, that the representations were made for the purpose of inducing the plaintiffs to make sales of the goods to the defendant on credit. This is an inference of Brown.