Case law

Marine Forests Society v. California Coastal Commission

30 Cal. Rptr. 3d 30 · California Supreme Court · Jun 23, 2005

In Brown v. … (Brown v. Superior Court, supra, 15 Cal.3d 52, 56 .) In Brown , no separation of powers issue was raised or decided.

In Re Stembridge

287 B.R. 658 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Texas · Dec 9, 2002

Corp. v. … Reading Co. v. Brown, 391 U.S. 471 , 88 S.Ct. 1759 , 20 L.Ed.2d 751 (1968). In Reading, it was alleged (and ultimately held by the Court) that a post-petition tort could give rise to an administrative expense claim.

Brown v. Brown

209 So. 2d 622 · Mississippi Supreme Court · Apr 22, 1968

BRADY, Justice: The issues in this case are governed completely by the decisions in the following cases: Towles v. Towles, 243 Miss. 59 , 137 So.2d 182 (1962) ; Kincaid v. … Kincaid, 213 Miss. 451 , 57 So.2d 263 (1952); De Marco v. De Marco, 199 Miss. 165 , 24 So.2d 358 (1946); Moore v. Moore, 163 Miss. 15 , 140 So. 526 (1932) ; and Ramsay v.

Chemaik v. Brown

364 Or. 849 · Oregon Supreme Court · May 23, 2019

Speight v. United States

671 A.2d 442 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Feb 1, 1996

See Cauthen v. United States, 592 A.2d 1021, 1022 (D.C.1991); Brown v. United States, 590 A.2d 1008, 1020 (D.C.1991). … See Brown, 590 A.2d at 1015 .

Brown Ex Rel. Brown v. Martinez

68 N.M. 271 · New Mexico Supreme Court · Apr 7, 1961

State v. … Riddle v. Brown (1852) 20 Ala. 412 , 56 Am.Dec. 202, 9 Mor.Min.Rep. 219; Riffel v. Letts (1916) 31 Cal.App. 426 , 160 Pac. 845 ; McLean v. Colf (1918) 179 Cal. 237 , 176 Pac. 169 ; Wharton v.

Dwayne Ballinger, Jr. v. John Prelesnik

709 F.3d 558 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 4, 2013

In arguing that the Michigan courts did not decide his claim on the merits and, thus, that the limitations of § 2254(d) do not apply, Ballinger relies on our pre- Harrington decision in Brown v. … To the extent that Brown is inconsistent with Harrington’s definition of “on the merits,” however, it is no longer the law. See Brown v.

Commonwealth ex rel. Judicial Conduct Board v. Griffin

591 Pa. 351 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 26, 2007

V, §■ 18(a)(7) (setting forth the investigative tools of the Judicial Conduct Board); Art. Y, § 18(b)(5) (describing the functions of the Court of Judicial Discipline); Art. … Nothing in this opinion speaks to the authority of the Judicial Conduct Board to move forward with a complaint against Judge Griffin in its capacity as outlined in Pa. Const, art. V§ 18.

Miller v. Smith

431 F. Supp. 821 · District Court, N.D. Texas · May 11, 1977

As the opinion in Monroe v. … See, for example, Ortiz v. LaVallee, 442 F.2d 912 (2nd Cir., 1971) and Ney v. State of California, 439 F.2d 1285 (9th Cir., 1971). 16 . Knowles v. Carson, 419 F.2d 369, 371 (5th Cir., 1969). 17 . Jones v.

Brown & Brown, Inc. v. Flagg

11 So. 3d 946 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Jun 24, 2009

11 So.3d 946 (2009) BROWN & BROWN, INC. v. FLAGG. No. 2D08-2917. District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District. June 24, 2009. Decision without published opinion Affirmed.

Brown v. Brown (In Re Brown)

36 B.R. 103 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Kansas · Mar 29, 1983

Matter of Steingesser, 602 F.2d 36 (2d Cir.1979); Poolman v. Poolman, 289 F.2d 332 (8th Cir.1961); 2. Whether there was a wide disparity in the parties’ incomes. Matter of Woods, 561 F.2d 27 (7th Cir.1977); and 3. … Nitz v. Nitz, 568 F.2d 148 (10th Cir.1977). Here the Court finds that extrinsic evidence should be considered because the Browns’ intent cannot be gleaned from the divorce decree alone.

Cates v. Brown & Brown, Inc.

9 So. 3d 617 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Jun 1, 2009

9 So.3d 617 (2009) CATES v. BROWN & BROWN, INC. No. 1D08-2468. District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District. June 1, 2009. Decision without published opinion. Affirmed.

Commonwealth ex rel. Brown v. Brown

195 Pa. Super. 324 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 15, 1961

In Commonwealth v. … The statute was never intended to constitute a court a sounding board for domestic financial disagreements, nor a board of arbitration to determine the extent to which a husband is required to recognize the budget *329 suggested

Wang v. New Hampshire Board of Registration in Medicine

55 F.3d 698 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Jun 6, 1995

Simon v. … Schneider v.

Miller v. Oregon Board of Parole & Post-Prison Supervision

642 F.3d 711 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jan 18, 2011

See Himes v. Thompson, 336 F.3d 848, 852-53 (9th Cir. 2003). 916 MILLER v. OREGON BOARD OF PAROLE A. … MILLER v. OREGON BOARD OF PAROLE 919 B.

Brown v. Brown

146 N.Y.S. 1085 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 6, 1914

State v. Brown

99 N.E.3d 1135 · Ohio Court of Appeals · Nov 3, 2017

[Cite as State v. Brown, 2017-Ohio-8416.] … Florida v.

Ramey v. District of Columbia Department of Employment Services

997 A.2d 694 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jul 1, 2010

In Ramey v. District of Columbia Dep’t of Employment Servs., 950 A.2d 38 (D.C.2008) (Ramey I), we l’emanded the case for the CRB to reconsider its decision in light of our decision in McCamey v. … See Mayers v.

Wilkinson v. Board of Dental Examiners of Alabama

102 So. 3d 368 · Supreme Court of Alabama · May 25, 2012

In Vaughan v. … In Lee v.

Geo. Seligson & Co. v. Brown & Brown

61 Tex. 180 · Texas Supreme Court · Feb 19, 1884

We do not, however, undertake to decide whether or not any application of these notes would have saved the sale to Brown & Brown from being held fraudulent. … Avery v. Johann, 27 Wis., 246 ; Green v. Gantum, 19 N. J. Eq., 105; Gregory v. Harrington, 33 Vt., 241 . It has been held to the contrary in Mississippi (Farmers’ Bank v.