Case law

Brown v. Brown

591 So. 2d 1043 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Dec 26, 1991

In Cameron v. … See also, Villaverde v. Villaverde, 547 So.2d 185 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989).

LOVELL v. RAFFENSPERGER

318 Ga. 48 · Supreme Court of Georgia · Jan 17, 2024

In analyzing this question, we begin with the text of Paragraph V (b) (2), which provides: Actions filed pursuant to this Paragraph against this state or any agency, authority, branch, board, bureau … Here, Appellants named as defendants the Secretary, not the State of Georgia, and their local boards of election and their board members, not the relevant counties.

DeLoge v. State

156 P.3d 1004 · Wyoming Supreme Court · Apr 27, 2007

Brown v. Avery, 850 P.2d 612, 616-617 (Wyo.1998). We have previously explained that [blias is a leaning of the mind or an inclination toward one person over another. … Umited States v.

Brown v. Brown

429 So. 2d 846 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Apr 20, 1983

429 So.2d 846 (1983) Daniel Joseph BROWN, Appellant, v. Catherine Mary BROWN, Appellee. No. 82-950. District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District. April 20, 1983. *847 Clifford M. … In Ball v.

Bogan v. District of Columbia Board of Parole

749 A.2d 127 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Mar 23, 2000

See Smith v. United States, 597 A.2d 377 , 380 n. 2 (D.C.1991). The Board has been replaced by the U.S. … “We do not review the merits of the Board’s decision in denying parole, and are limited to a review of the procedures used by the Board in reaching its decision.” Smith v.

Brown v. Brown

181 N.C. App. 333 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jan 2, 2007

See Brown v. Brown, 171 N.C. App. 358 , 615 S.E.2d 39 (2005); Brown v. Brown, 171 N.C. … In Brown v. Brown, 171 N.C.

Brown v. Brown

34 A.D.2d 727 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Apr 9, 1970

(People v. De Renzzio, 19 N Y 2d 45, 50-51; People v. Friola, 11 N Y 2d 157, 159; Von Diezleski v. Food Fair Stores, 18 A D 2d 724.)

Brown v. Brown

101 Nev. 144 · Nevada Supreme Court · Mar 19, 1985

We remanded the matter to the district court to allow it to reconsider its decree in view of McCarty v. McCarty, 453 U.S. 210 (1981). … While the courts have inherent power “to protect and defend their decrees by contempt proceedings,” Noble v. Noble, 86 Nev. 459, 463 , 470 P.2d 430, 432 (1970), courts are, nevertheless, bound by statute.

Brown v. Brown

38 N.C. App. 607 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Nov 7, 1978

Ratliff v. Duke Power Co., 268 N.C. 605 , 151 S.E. 2d 641 (1966); McNamara v. Outlaw, 262 N.C. 612 , 138 S.E. 2d 287 (1964). … Farmers Oil Co. v. Miller, 264 N.C. 101 , 141 S.E. 2d 41 (1965); Eason v. Grimsley, 255 N.C. 494 , 121 S.E. 2d 885 (1961).

Brown v. Brown

84 So. 3d 170 · Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama · Aug 6, 2010

84 So.3d 170 (2010) HAROLD BROWN v. MARIAN BROWN. No. 2090565. Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama. August 6, 2010. DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION Affirmed.

Brown v. Brown

169 Ga. 580 · Supreme Court of Georgia · Dec 13, 1929

Robert Brown filed suit for divorce against his wife, Mary Brown, on February 11, 1929, alleging cruel treatment by her. … See Smith v. Smith, 162 Ga. 349 ( 133 S. E. 842 ); Dougherty v. Dougherty, 150 Ga. 206 ( 103 S. E. 168 ).

Brown v. Brown

112 N.C. App. 614 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Nov 16, 1993

Bryson v. Sullivan, 330 N.C. 644 , 412 S.E.2d 327 (1992). In Turner v. … Turner v. Duke Univ., 325 N.C. 152, 165 , 381 S.E.2d 706, 714 (1989).

Rosa Lee BROWN, Appellant, v. Otis R. BOWEN, M.D., Secretary of Health and Human Services, Appellee

827 F.2d 311 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Aug 21, 1987

On March 25, 1986, this court held in Brown v. … In light of this decision of the Supreme Court, we withdraw our earlier opinion in Brown v.

Brown v. Brown

30 S.W.2d 1110 · Court of Appeals of Texas · Jul 11, 1930

Brown, should prevail. LI J In view of these several conditions, it is of importance to ascertain the intention of the parties in order that it may be determined when the sale took place. In Woods v. … Hickman v. Hickman (Tex. Civ. App.) 20 S.W.(2d) 1073 , and numerous authorities there cited. For the reasons assigned, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

Brown v. Brown

169 Cal. App. 2d 54 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 24, 1959

. * This is an appeal by Frank Brown and Ernestine Brown, plaintiffs, from an order made and entered on May 14, 1957, granting the motion of the defendants, Lawrence Brown and Sara E. Brown, doing business as “B. & B. … In Baird v.

Brown v. Brown

402 So. 2d 344 · Mississippi Supreme Court · Aug 12, 1981

Brown v. Brown

192 Mich. App. 44 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Nov 19, 1991

We agree with the reasoning in two decisions issued by panels of the Court of Appeals, Jewett v Jewett, 172 Mich App 391 ; 431 NW2d 523 (1988), and Olepa v Olepa, 151 Mich App 690 ; 391 NW2d 446 (1986). … Jewett, supra; Olepa, supra. *46 We note that another panel of this Court reached a different conclusion in Attard v Adamczyk, 141 Mich App 246 ; 367 NW2d 75 (1985), apparently premising its decision on the fact that a divorce

Roberts v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board

719 A.2d 847 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 23, 1998

Mancini’s Bakery v. Workmen’s Compensation Appeal Board (Leone), 155 Pa.Cmwlth. 641 , 625 A.2d 1308 (1993). … Russell v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board (Volkswagen of America), 121 Pa.Cmwlth. 436 , 550 A.2d 1364 (1988).

Singer v. Bureau of Professional & Occupational Affairs

159 Pa. Commw. 385 · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 29, 1993

Dowler v. *389 Public School Employes’ Retirement Board, 153 Pa.Commonwealth Ct. 109, 620 A.2d 639 (1993). … Mormak v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 135 Pa.Commonwealth Ct. 232, 579 A.2d 1383 (1990).

Brown v. Brown

652 S.W.2d 828 · Court of Appeals of Texas · May 26, 1983

Cavanaugh v. Davis, 149 Tex. 573 , 235 S.W.2d 972 (Tex.1951); King v. Heirs & Beneficiaries of Watkins, 624 S.W.2d 252 (Tex.App.-Tyler 1981, writ ref’d n.r.e.). … Brown wanted to adopt Gina, but it is also very evident that there never was any agreement to adopt Gina because of the natural mother’s constant and consistent refusal to consent to the adoption. As was said in King v.