Find court opinions that match your case.
Search 313,007+ US court opinions imported from the Caselaw Access Project — Supreme Court, federal circuits, and state high courts. Filter by practice area, state, outcome, and connect with the attorneys who tried them.
Latest Opinions · freshly imported court decisions
The most recent court rulings now available in the library. Click through for the full opinion, the attorneys involved, and related cases.
Blanchard v. Steward Carney Hosp., Inc.
Doe v. Sex Offender Registry Bd.
Commonwealth v. Gomes
Marchese v. Bos. Redevelopment Auth.
Veolia Energy Bos., Inc. v. Bd. of Assessors of Bos.
Bos. Globe Media Partners, LLC v. Chief Justice of the Trial Court
Commonwealth v. Reyes
United States v. Block
Intellectual Property Cases
2,623 matching opinions . Filter by practice area below, or use the search above for free-text matching against title and syllabus.
Browse by State 28
Browse by Year 40
Moss v. Ramey
MOSS v. RAMEY. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OP THE STATE OP IDAHO. No. 61. Argued December 9, 1915. Decided January 10, 1916. The inference naturally arising from the silence of the field notes and plat that there was no island at the time of
Williams v. Johnson
WILLIAMS v. JOHNSON. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA. No. 110. Submitted December 6, 1915. Decided December 20, 1915. Indians are wards of the Nation; Congress has plenary control over tribal relations and property and t
Fireball Gas Tank & Illuminating Co. v. Commercial Acetylene Co.
FIREBALL GAS TANK & ILLUMINATING COMPANY v. COMMERCIAL ACETYLENE COMPANY AND PREST-O-LITE COMPANY. CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT; No. 13. Argued October 22, 1915. Decided November 29, 1915. A process may
Norton v. Whiteside
NORTON, EXECUTOR, v. WHITESIDE. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT. No. 55. Argued November 4, 5,1915. Decided November 29, 1915. A mere formal statement in the bill to the effect that the cause of action is one
La Roque v. United States
LA ROQUE v. UNITED STATES. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT. No. 240. Argued October 15, 18, 1915. Decided November 8, 1915. The Nelson Aet of January 14, 1889, c. 24, 25 Stat. 642, for allotment to Chippewas
Briggs v. United Shoe Machinery Co.
BRIGGS v. UNITED SHOE MACHINERY COMPANY. APPEAL PROM THE DISTRICT COURT OP THE UNITED STATES POR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OP NEW YORK. No. 638. Submitted October 12, 1915. Decided November 1, 1915. A suit for royalties reserved upon the sale o
Oregon & California Railroad v. United States
OREGON & CALIFORNIA RAILROAD COMPANY v. UNITED STATES. CERTIFICATE FROM AND CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT. No. 679. Argued April 23, 26, 27, 1915. Decided June 21, 1915. Where there are doubts whether a cl
Producers Oil Co. v. Hanzen
PRODUCERS OIL COMPANY v. HANZEN. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OP THE STATE OP LOUISIANA. No. 165. Submitted March 3, 1915. Decided June 14, 1915. The effect of riparian rights, attached to land conveyed by patent of the United States, depends
Woodward v. de Graffenried
WOODWARD v. de GRAFFENRIED. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OP THE STATE OP OKLAHOMA. No. 164. Submitted February 25, 1915. Decided June 14, 1915. In an action to determine by what law the beneficiaries of a Creek allotment are to be determined
Geneva Furniture Manufacturing Co. v. S. Karpen & Bros.
GENEVA FURNITURE MANUFACTURING COMPANY v. S. KARPEN & BROS. APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS. No. 496. Submitted December 17, 1914. Decided June 14, 1915. Where the plaintiff really m
Perryman v. Woodward
PERRYMAN v. WOODWARD. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OP THE STATE OP OKLAHOMA. No. 277. Argued May 12, 13, 1915. Decided June 14, 1915. The Townsite Commission of Muskogee Creek Nation Indian Territory awarded a lot to the party having the poss
Kapiolani Estate, Ltd. v. Atcherley
KAPIOLANI ESTATE, LIMITED, v. ATCHERLEY. APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE TERRITORY OF HAWAII. No. 174. Argued April 30, 1915. Decided June 14, 1915. A decree was made in 1855, by the Hawaiian court having jurisdiction, to the effect th
Sawyer v. Gray
SAWYER v. GRAY. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT. No. 632. Argued April 22, 1915. Decided June 1, 1915. Daniels v. Wagner, ante, p. 547, followed to the effect that the Secretary of the Interior has no discreti
Bothwell v. Bingham County
BOTHWELL v. BINGHAM COUNTY, IDAHO. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF IDAHO. No. 266. Argued May 6, 1915. Decided June 1, 1915. The determinative fact of whether property formerly part of the public domain of the United "States is s
G. & C. Merriam Co. v. Syndicate Publishing Co.
G. & C. MERRIAM COMPANY, v. SYNDICATE PUBLISHING COMPANY. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT. No. 217. Argued April 14, 1915. Decided June 1, 1915. In a case where diverse citizenship exists, the decree of the C
Daniels v. Bernhard
DANIELS v. BERNHARD. SAME v. HOWARD. SAME v. LEONARD. SAME v. WAKEFIELD. APPEALS PROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OP'APPEALS POR THE NINTH CIRCUIT. Nos. 241, 242, 243, 244. Argued April 21, 1915. Decided June 1, 1915. Decided on authority of Daniels
Daniels v. Wagner
DANIELS v. WAGNER. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT. No. 239. Argued April 21, 1915. Decided June 1, 1915. Under the Forest Act of June 4, 1897, c. 2, 30 Stat. 36, one whose land was included in a forest reserv
Booth-Kelly Lumber Co. v. United States
BOOTH-KELLY LUMBER COMPANY v. UNITED STATES. APPEAL PROM THE 'CIRCUIT COURT OP APPEALS POR THE NINTH CIRCUIT. No. 258. Argued May 4, 5, 1915. Decided May 17, 1915. Judgment of the Circuit Court of Appeal cancelling patents for timber lands
Healy v. Sea Gull Specialty Co.
HEALY v. SEA GULL SPECIALTY CO. APPEAL PROM THE DISTRICT COURT OP THE UNITED STATES -FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OP LOUISIANA. No. 253. Argued May 3, 1915. Decided May 17, 1915. Where it appears from the plaintiff’s statement that his case is
Doran v. Kennedy
DORAN v. KENNEDY. ERROR' TO THE SUPREME COURT OP THE STATE OP MINNESOTA. ' No. 224. Argued April 16, 1915. Decided April 26, 1915. Where the homesteader has made final proof before his death and become entitled to the patent, his heirs unde
United States ex rel. Chott v. Ewing
UNITED STATES EX REL. CHOTT v. EWING, COMMISSIONER OF PATENTS. ERROR TO THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. No. 194. Argued March 10, 11, 1915. Decided April 12, 1915. The provisions of the Judicial Code in regard to the juris
Knapp v. Alexander-Edgar Lumber Co.
KNAPP v. ALEXANDER-EDGAR LUMBER COMPANY. ERROR TO THE’CIRCUIT COURT OF BAYFIELD COUNTY, STATE OF WISCONSIN. No. 139. Submitted January 18, 1915. Decided April 5, 1915. An entryman’s interest prior to aGtual possession is more than mere colo
W. S. Tyler Co. v. Ludlow-Saylor Wire Co.
W. S. TYLER COMPANY v. LUDLOW-SAYLOR WIRE COMPANY. APPEAL FROM AND PETITION EOK CEKTIORAKI TO THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK. Nos. 441, 622. Argued December 16, 1914; petition for writ of certi
Great Northern Railway Co. v. Hower
GREAT NORTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY v. HOWER. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OP THE STATE OP WASHINGTON. No. 88. Submitted November 11, 1914 Decided March 22, 1915. Bona fide purchase is an affirmative defense which the grantee must set Up in order
Need an attorney for a case like these?
Browse 7,507+ verified US attorneys whose names appear in real court opinions. Filter by practice area and state to find someone with relevant experience.