Case law

State v. Brown

550 So. 2d 645 · Supreme Court of Louisiana · Oct 20, 1989

In re Brown, Robert L.; applying for supervisory/remedial writs; Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court, Div. “F”, No. 309-794; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 88KW-0877. Denied.

State v. Brown

528 So. 2d 564 · Supreme Court of Louisiana · Aug 4, 1988

In re Brown, Newton; —Defendant(s); applying for supervisory and/or remedial writs; Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court, Div. “G”, No. 326-188.

State v. Brown

360 So. 2d 185 · Supreme Court of Louisiana · Jun 28, 1978

Brown was charged with second degree murder in violation of La.R.S. 14:30.1 and after trial by jury was found guilty as charged.

State v. Brown

526 So. 2d 1119 · Supreme Court of Louisiana · Jun 24, 1988

Brown v. Bankston

299 So. 2d 796 · Supreme Court of Louisiana · Sep 13, 1974

In re: Gayle Bankston and Thomas Brown Donnell applying for writs of prohibition, certiorari, and mandamus. Writ denied. No showing made to warrant the exercise of our supervisory jurisdiction.

Brown v. Hilton

250 So. 2d 196 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · May 31, 1971

Sonnier v. Brown

159 So. 2d 406 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Dec 6, 1963

The decision of the referee, based upon the aforesaid finding, was affirmed by the Board of Review. … No additional evidence may be received by even the trial court, but the court may order additional evidence to be taken before the Board of Review. LSA-R.S. 23:1634.

Brown v. State

195 So. 52 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jan 5, 1940

Brown, was walking on the right hand side of the road, facing the direction in which he was going * * * before daybreak and keeping no lookout, voluntarily placed himself in a position of danger on said road; that he *53

Brown v. Ware

11 La. App. 216 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jul 1, 1929

Brown and Bettie Brown Wilkinson, sued T. H. Ware and E. M. … Brown and Bettie Brown Wil *218 kinson and against the defendants E. M. Blake and Hamilton Ivins cancelling and annulling the lease of the S. % of S. E.

Hudson v. Brown

190 So. 860 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Jun 28, 1939

Brown, the driver of the car, Henry Vatter Garage, Inc., the owner of the car and employer of Brown, and the New Amsterdam Casualty Company, the insurer of the car for property damage and -public liability. … Brown, who was driving a Hudson Sedan belonging to the .

Grimsley v. Brown

143 So. 532 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Oct 5, 1932

Brown, died, and his minor child, William V. Brown, Jr., through his natural tutrix, Mrs. Maude Ard Brown, was made party defendant. … The testimony reveals that William V.

Brown v. Harvey

45 So. 2d 377 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · Apr 6, 1950

Brown v. Durand

255 La. 285 · Supreme Court of Louisiana · Feb 6, 1970

Brown-applying- for writs of .certiorari, prohibition and mandar mus. Writ refused. The showing made does not warrant the exercise of our supervisory jurisdiction.

State v. Brown

547 So. 2d 379 · Supreme Court of Louisiana · Aug 22, 1989

In re Brown, Joseph; — Defendant(s); applying for supervisory and/or remedial *380 writs; Parish of St. Charles, 29th Judicial District Court, Div. “D”, No. 89-0191.

Brown v. Bouny

30 La. Ann. 174 · Supreme Court of Louisiana · Jan 15, 1878

Brown’s domicile in New Orleans by leaving them with plaintiff, her son, she being absent. … Brown; to wit: her taxes and this mortgage claim. There is no pretense or allegation of fraud in the defendants.

Brown v. Thompson

6 Mart. (N.S.) 426 · Supreme Court of Louisiana · Jan 15, 1828

Brown v. Wright

6 La. Ann. 253 · Supreme Court of Louisiana · Mar 15, 1851

The plaintiff had introduced a witness named West, who on his direct examination stated that the defendant, on the day after the money, a fifty dollar bank note, was missed, told him that he, the defendant, believed Brown … Upon his cross-examination by the defendant, he testified that he asked the defendant what cause he had for suspecting Brown.

Cuny v. Brown

12 La. 82 · Supreme Court of Louisiana · Oct 15, 1845

principle adopted by the .court, that the husband could not validly authorize his wife to contract, when such contract involves her as a surety for his debts, yet that as it appears that only a small part of the debt to Brown … But we are of opinion that the husband’s consent cannot be divided; non constat, that Brown would have accepted a mortgage without such priority as to the whole of the debt, nor that Stephen E.

Brown v. Bemiss

2 La. Ann. 365 · Supreme Court of Louisiana · Mar 15, 1847

If he has no privilege, but only a claim for the increased value of the property resulting from useful improvements made by him, his remedy is clearly pointed out in the case of Lanusse v. Lanna, 6 Mart. N. S. 103.

Brown v. Hughes

2 La. Ann. 623 · Supreme Court of Louisiana · Jun 15, 1847

Heath et al. v. Howell & Johnson, 15 La. 139 . In this respect the judgment must be amended.