Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

FiltersMA

10,000+ results

3.76s

  • Brown v. Lakeman

    32 Mass. 151 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Nov 15, 1833

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Brown v. Putnam

    43 Mass. 275 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Mar 15, 1841

    . * As this case formerly was presented to the court, it appeared to us that there was a breach of the contract on the part of the master, Brown, one of the plaintiffs, in not filling up the entire eleven twelfths of the … And although in the event that happened, it was fortunate for the defendants that it was not en tirely filled up, yet if the plaintiff Brown, with whom the other plaintiff was connected, by a plain breach of the agreement

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Valentine v. Brown

    35 Mass. 549 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Nov 10, 1836

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Commonwealth v. Brown

    24 Mass. App. Ct. 979 · Massachusetts Appeals Court · Sep 28, 1987

    Commonwealth v. Gallison, 383 Mass. 659, 672 (1981), quoting from Commonwealth v. Beneficial Fin. Co., 360 Mass. 188, 221 (1971), cert. denied sub nom. Farrell v. Massachusetts, 407 U.S. 910 , and Beneficial Fin. Co. v. … See Commonwealth v. Palmariello, 392 Mass. 126, 134 (1984); Commonwealth v. Kozec, 399 Mass. 514, 521 (1987); Commonwealth v. Lowe, 15 Mass. App. Ct. 262, 267 (1983); Commonwealth v. Modica, 24 Mass. App.

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • M'Gregor v. Brown

    22 Mass. 170 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Sep 15, 1827

    See Cushing v. Hurd, 4 Pick. 253 . 1 This is now made a part of the duty of the officer, by Revised Stat c 73, § 17. … Emerson v. Towle, 5 Greenl. 197; Welsh v. Joy, 13 Pick. 481 . See Revised Stat. c. 73, § 18; M'Mechan v. Griffin, 3 Pick. (2d ed ) 154 157, notes, and cases there collected.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Clark v. Brown

    78 Mass. 355 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Mar 15, 1859

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Brown v. Howe

    75 Mass. 84 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Sep 15, 1857

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Brown v. Wells

    53 Mass. 501 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Sep 15, 1847

    The party seeking to be admitted to prosecute this petition, and to obtain judgment of partition thereon, is the widow and sole devisee of Amos Brown, deceased, who originally filed the petition. … The court are therefore of opinion that the party, here applying to be admitted to appear and prosecute the petition of Amos Brown/or partition, is not authorized by law so to do. Exceptions overruled.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Commonwealth v. Brown

    53 Mass. 522 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Sep 15, 1847

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Walden v. Brown

    78 Mass. 102 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Nov 15, 1858

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Brown v. Brightman

    93 Mass. 226 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Oct 15, 1865

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Seeley v. Brown

    31 Mass. 177 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Sep 15, 1833

    In Hill v. … And, that the plaintiff would have been allowed in that case to show that no new demand had been proved before the referees, nor allowed by them, appears quite- clear by a note in the case of Willis v.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Brown v. Cummings

    89 Mass. 507 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Nov 15, 1863

    In Boyce v. … In Moore v. Adam, 2 Chit.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Brown v. Smith

    66 Mass. 366 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Oct 15, 1853

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Tuttle v. Brown

    64 Mass. 262 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Oct 15, 1852

    Perley v. Balch, 23 Pick. 283 . Evidence on this point was competent under the general issue. 1 Chit. Pl. (6th Am. ed.) 600.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Dall v. Brown

    59 Allen 289 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Mar 15, 1850

    that William and Josiah Brown had at the time of their decease. … But, in the deed of Farrington to the Browns, the sea-wall is not mentioned.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Olney v. Brown

    19 Mass. 572 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Oct 15, 1824

    J. said the question was settled in the preceding case of Miller v. Miller, and the exceptions were sustained.1 See Miller v. Miller, ante, 570; Howe’s Pract. 454.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Prouty v. Brown

    22 Mass. App. Ct. 992 · Massachusetts Appeals Court · Aug 25, 1986

    The plaintiff is barred from recovery under the reasoning of Cyr v. Farias, 367 Mass. 720, 722-723 (1975), in which the Supreme Judicial Court concluded that the limitations of G. … The Supreme Judicial Court came to a different conclusion in Murphy v.

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • Harrington v. Brown

    22 Mass. 519 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Oct 15, 1827

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Anderson v. Brown

    76 Mass. 92 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Nov 15, 1857

    Co. v. Winslow, 3 Gray, 415 . The language of the Rev. Sts. c. 99, § 19, clearly embraces a case of this kind.

    Cited 0 timesPublished

Ask Donna

Ask Donna

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.