Case law

State v. Brown

248 N.C. 314 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Apr 30, 1958

Therefore, on authority of S. v. Brown, ante, 311, and for the reasons stated therein, a venire de novo is ordered.

Garrow v. Brown

1 N.C. 46 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jun 15, 1864

least, exceedingly uncertain and fluctuating, He was advised by friends, upon whose counsel he liad icretoibre relied, not to make the bargain without further iformation ; and it was then understood and agreed, the efendant Brown … being present, that no farther action houkl bo taken ir, the’matter until the information needed _as obtained. ’■ ^ After this arrangement, the friends of Whitaker left the ouse, and thereupon, Brown, having remained, renewed

Honeycutt v. Brown

191 N.C. 829 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · May 19, 1926

Brown v. Harding

172 N.C. 835 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Oct 4, 1916

Purvis v. Brown.

39 N.C. 413 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Dec 5, 1846

The bill, then alleges, that William Purvis, their father,-borrowed of the defendant Brown $100, and to secure' the payment thereof, the negro Travis was mortgaged to the defendant by William Purvis, and that the plaintiff

Brown v. . Beard

6 N.C. 125 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jan 5, 1812

TaxloR, Chief-Justice, delivered the opinion of the Cburt: The widow could convey only a life estate in the land she sold to Brown, because she and the other executor had previously executed.

Coltraine v. . Brown

71 N.C. 19 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jun 5, 1874

Frazier at Trinity College to board and attend school, and the testatrix came back to Dempsey Brown's, where she staid a few weeks and then went on a visit to said Frazier's house, where Joe C. … Brown was boarding as aforesaid, and there she remained for thirty-three days. Frazier stated that soon after coming to his house the old lady, (the alleged testatrix) then about eighty years of age, and Joe C.

Russ v. . Brown

113 N.C. 227 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Sep 5, 1893

When the defendant Brown was on the stand in his own (228) behalf, the defendant's counsel, with a view to corroborating Mr. … Brown in his testimony that the services of the plaintiff for the first three months were not satisfactory to him as justifying the defendant in agreeing to the increased wages claimed by the plaintiff, asked the witness

Brown v. Fox

328 N.C. 329 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Mar 7, 1991

Hampton v. . Brown

35 N.C. 18 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Dec 5, 1851

The reason why the sheriff has the action, is, that the debtor is discharged and the sheriff becomes liable to the value of ihe goods, and therefore the law vests the property in him; Wilbraham v Snow, 2 Saund. 47.

Brown v. Candler

236 N.C. 576 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Dec 10, 1952

Kistler v. Board of Education, supra; Feezor v. Siceloff; 232 N.C. 563 , 61 S.E. 2d 714 ; Board of Education v. Lewis, 231 N.C. 661 , 58 S.E. 2d 725 ; Atkins v. McAden, supra; Messer *581 v. … Feezor v. Siceloff, supra,; Board of Education v. Lewis, supra; Atkins v. McAden, supra; Moore v. Board of Education, 212 N.C. 499 , 193 S.E. 732 .

State v. Brown

326 N.C. 598 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · May 10, 1990

Harris v. Brown

325 N.C. 431 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Oct 5, 1989

Shore v. Brown

325 N.C. 229 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jul 26, 1989

Shore v. Brown

323 N.C. 626 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Dec 8, 1988

Brown v. Turrentine

320 N.C. 511 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jul 28, 1987

Johnson v. Brown

320 N.C. 513 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jul 28, 1987

Brown v. Boone

318 N.C. 692 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jan 6, 1987

State v. Brown

315 N.C. 392 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jan 7, 1986

Petition by defendant (Brown) for writ of certiorari to the North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 7 January 1986.

Johnson v. Brown

71 N.C. App. 660 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Dec 18, 1984

E.g., Gaylord v. Gaylord, 150 N.C. 222 , 63 S.E. 1028 (1909); Best v. Perry, 41 N.C. App. 107 , 254 S.E. 2d 281 (1979). … Such transactions are presumed fraudulent, Willetts v. Willetts, 254 N.C. 136 , 118 S.E. 2d 548 (1961); McNeill v. McNeill, 223 N.C. 178, 25 S.E. 2d 615 (1943); Cole v.