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
Baglin v. Cusenier Co.
BAGLIN, SUPERIOR GENERAL OF THE ORDER OF CARTHUSIAN MONKS, v. CUSENIER COMPANY. APPEAL FROM AND ON CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT. No. 99. Argued March 14, 15, 1911. Decided May 29, 1911. While names which
United States v. Johnson
UNITED STATES v. JOHNSON. •ERROR TO THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI. No. 433. Argued April 13, 1911. Decided May 29, 1911. The term “misbranded” and the phrase defining what amounts to misbrandin
Montello Salt Co. v. Utah
MONTELLO SALT COMPANY v. STATE OF UTAH. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF UTAH. No. 136. Argued April 21, 1911. Decided May 29, 1911. The words “and including” following a description do not necessarily mean “in addition to,” but m
Sargent & Lahr v. Herrick & Stevens
SARGENT & LAHR v. HERRICK & STEVENS. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE CjfF IOWA. No. 149. Argued April 25, 1911. Decided May 15, 1911. The mere location of a land warrant does not operate as a payment of the purchase price and does n
Hallowell v. United States
HALLOWELL v. UNITED STATES. CERTIFICATE FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT. No. 89. Argued March 16, 1911. Decided May 15, 1911. The power of the United States to make rules and regulations respecting tribal lands, the
Tiger v. Western Investment Co.
MARCHIE TIGER v. WESTERN INVESTMENT COMPANY. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE ÓF OKLAHOMA. No. 60. Argued November 30, December 1, 2, 1910; restored to docket for reargument January 23, 1911; reargued March 1, 2, 1911. Decided May 15
Jacobs v. Beecham
JACOBS v. BEECHAM. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT. No. 139. Argued April 21, 24,1911. Decided May 15, 1911. Corruptio optimi pessima. Sound general principles should not be turned to support a conclusion man
Northern Pacific Railway Co. v. Trodick
NORTHERN PACIFIC RAILWAY COMPANY v. TRODICK. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT. ■ No. 117. Argued April 11, 1911. Decided May 15, 1911. Land within place limits of the Northern Pacific Land Grant Act of July 2,1
Standard Paint Co. v. Trinidad Asphalt Manufacturing Co.
STANDARD PAINT COMPANY v. TRINIDAD ASPHALT MANUFACTURING COMPANY. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT. No. 106. Argued March 16, 1911. Decided April 10, 1911. No sign or form of words can be appropriated as a val
Diamond Rubber Co. of New York v. Consolidated Rubber Tire Co.
DIAMOND RUBBER COMPANY OF NEW YORK v. CONSOLIDATED RUBBER TIRE COMPANY. CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT. No. 36. Argued February 28, March 1, 1911. Decided April 10, 1911. Where a device possesses such amou
Dr. Miles Medical Co. v. John D. Park & Sons Co.
DR. MILES MEDICAL COMPANY v. JOHN D. PARK & SONS COMPANY. CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OP APPEALS POR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT. No. 72. Argued January 4, 5, 1911. Decided April 3, 1911. An actionable wrong is committed by one who maliciously in
Hills & Co. v. Hoover
HILLS & COMPANY, LIMITED, v. HOOVER. CERTIFICATE from the circuit court of appeals for THE THIRD CIRCUIT. No. 101. Argued March 15, 16, 1911. Decided April 3, 1911. The copyright statutes of the United States afford all the relief to which
Flint v. Stone Tracy Co.
FLINT v. STONE TRACY COMPANY. VAN DERHOEFF v. CONEY ISLAND AND BROOKLYN RAILROAD COMPANY. HINE v. HOME LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY. SMITH v. NORTHERN TRUST COMPANY. MINER v. CORN EXCHANGE NATIONAL BANK. CEDAR STREET COMPANY v. PARK REALTY COMPAN
Roughton v. Knight
ROUGHTON v. KNIGHT. IN ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OP THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. No. 711. Submitted January 6, 1911. Decided February 20, 1911. As the Forest Reserve provision of the Sundry Civil Act of June 4, 1897, c. 2, 30 Stat. 36, did not
Merrimack River Savings Bank v. City of Clay Center
MERRIMACK RIVER SAVINGS BANK v. CITY OF CLAY CENTER. IN RE PROCEEDINGS FOR CONTEMPT. No. 604. Argued January 26, 1911. Decided February 20, 1911. The force and effect of a decree dismissing a bill and discharging an injunction is neither su
Rogers v. Clark Iron Co.
ROGERS v. CLARK IRON COMPANY. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. No. 244. Motion to dismiss submitted April 4, 1910. Decided April 11, 1910. Where the state-court only decides who is entitled to lands under a patent no Fe
Los Angeles Farming & Milling Co. v. City of Los Angeles
LOS ANGELES FARMING AND MILLING COMPANY v. CITY OF LOS ANGELES. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. No. 137. Argued March 10, 11, 1910. Decided April 4, 1910. In this case both parties claim under Spanish or Mexican title
International Textbook Co v. Pigg
INTERNATIONAL TEXTBOOK COMPANY v. PIGG. • EBBOB TO THE SUPBEME COURT OP THE STATE OP KANSAS. No. 15. Argued April 21, 1909. Decided April 4, 1910. The reasonable construction of a state statute relating to foreign corporations doing busines
Frellsen & Co. v. Crandell
FRELLSEN AND COMPANY v. CRANDELL, REGISTER OF THE STATE LAND OFFICE OF LOUISIANA. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OP THE STATE OP LOUISIANA. No. 129. Argued March 7, 8, 1910. Decided April 4, 1910. Whether a patent is wrongfully issued or can be
Moore v. United States ex rel. Newcomb Motor Co.
MOORE, COMMISSIONER OF PATENTS, v. UNITED STATES EX REL. NEWCOMB MOTOR COMPANY. ERROR TO THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE DISTRICT OF, COLUMBIA. No. 115. Argued March 1, 2, 1910. Decided March 7, 1910. A writ of error to the Court of Appeals of
J. J. McCaskill Co v. United States
J. J. McCASKILL COMPANY v. UNITED STATES. APPEAL PROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OP APPEALS POR THE PIPTH CIRCUIT. No. 103. Argued January 25, 1910. Decided February 28, 1910. In this case it was held that the averments set forth in the bill of frau
Maryland v. West Virginia
STATE OF MARYLAND v. STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA. IN EQUITY. No. 1, Original. Argued November 2, 3, 4, 1909. Decided February 21, 1910. The record in this case sustains the proposition that for many yeáfs the people of Maryland, Virginia and Wes
Saxlehner v. Wagner
SAXLEHNER v. WAGNER. CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT. No. 81. Argued January 17, 1910. Decided February 21, 1910. .The right to individual appropriation once lost is gone forever. Where a geographic or famil
Ballinger v. United States ex rel. Frost
BALLINGER, SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR, v. UNITED STATES EX REL. FROST. ERROR TO THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. No. 64. Argued December 8, 1909. Decided February 21, 1910. The power of supervision and correction vested in
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.