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
E. C. Atkins & Co. v. Moore
E. C. ATKINS & COMPANY v. MOORE, COMMISSIONER OF PATENTS. APPEAL FROM AND IN ERROR TO THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. No. 86. Argued January 22, 1909, Decided February 23, 1909. Proceedings under the Trade-Mark Act of Febr
Johnson v. Mueser
JOHNSON v. MUESER. ERROR TO'THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. No. 67. Argued January 12, 1909. Decided February 23, 1909. Frasch v. Moore, 211 U. S. I, followed to effect that decisions of the Court of Appeals of the Distric
Spokane Valley Land & Water Co. v. Madson
SPOKANE VALLEY LAND & WATER COMPANY v. MADSON. SAME v. SAME. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON.' Nos. 202, 231. Motion to dismiss. Submitted Januaiy 18, 1909. Decided January 25, 1909. Writs of error to review judgments
United States v. Biggs
UNITED STATES v. BIGGS. ERROR TO THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE ■ DISTRICT OF COLORADO. No. 289. Argued December 16, 17, 1908. Decided January 4, 1909. United States v. Keitel, arde, p. 370, followed as to the power of this
United States v. Keitel
UNITED STATES v. KEITEL. ERROR TO THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR • THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO. No. 286. Argued October 22, 23, 26, 1908. Decided December 14, 1908. Where an indictment is quashed because the facts charged are not
Garfield v. United States ex rel. Goldsby
GARFIELD, SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR, v. UNITED STATES ex rel. GOLDSBY. ERROR TO THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. No. 248. Argued October 15, 18, 1908. Decided November 30, 1908. While acts of public officials which require
Bowers Hydraulic Dredging Co. v. United States
BOWERS HYDRAULIC DREDGING COMPANY v. UNITED STATES. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF CLAIMS. No. 9. Argued November 11, 1908. Decided November 30, 1908. Where words used in a contract are plain and unambiguous, expert testimony, as to their commerc
Louisiana v. Garfield
STATE OF LOUISIANA v. GARFIELD, SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR. ORIGINAL IN EQUITY.’ No. 7. Argued October 27, 28, 1908. Decided November 9, 1908. This court has no jurisdiction of an action brought by a State against the Secretary of the Interi
Brandon v. Ard
BRANDON v. ARD. EEEOB TO THE SUPEEME COUET OP THE STATE OP KANSAS. No. 24. Submitted April 29, 1908. Decided October 19, 1908. The policy of the Federal Government toward bona fide settlers upon the public lands is liberal and the law deals
Frasch v. Moore
FRASCH v. MOORE. APPEAL FROM AND IN ERROR TO THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. No. 14. Argued April 23, 24, 1908. Decided October 19, 1908. A decision of the Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia in an appeal from the
Continental Paper Bag Co. v. Eastern Paper Bag Co.
CONTINENTAL PAPER BAG COMPANY v. EASTERN PAPER BAG COMPANY. CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT. No. 202. Argued April 15, 1908. Decided June 1, 1908. The previous decisions of this court are not to be construed
Globe Newspaper Co. v. Walker
GLOBE NEWSPAPER COMPANY v. WALKER. ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS. No. 210. Argued April 23, 1908. Decided June 1, 1908. The right of an author in'the United States to multiply copies of hi
Scribner v. Straus
SCRIBNER v. STRAUS et al., TRADING AS R. H. MACY & COMPANY. CHARLES SCRIBNER’S SONS, INCORPORATED, APPELLANT, v. SAME. APPEALS FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOB THE SECOND . CIRCUIT. Nos. 204, 205. Argued April 16, 1908. Decided June 1,
Bobbs-Merrill Co. v. Straus
BOBBS-MERRILL COMPANY, v. STRAUS et al. doing business as R. H. MACY & COMPANY. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT. No. 176. Argued March 12, 13, 1908. Decided June 1, 1908. There are differences between the pat
United States v. Chandler-Dunbar Water Power Co.
UNITED STATES v. CHANDLER-DUNBAR WATER POWER COMPANY. APPEAL PROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OP APPEALS POR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT. No. 599. Argued April 6, 7, 8, 1908. Decided April 20, 1908. Statutes of limitations with regard to land affect the right
Hallowell v. United States
HALLOWELL v. UNITED STATES. CERTIFICATE FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT. No. 175. Argued March 12, 1908. Decided March 23, 1908. The authority given by § 6 of the Judiciary Act of March 3, 1891, 26 Stat. 826, to the
Dun v. Lumbermen's Credit Ass'n
DUN v. LUMBERMEN’S CREDIT ASSOCIATION. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT. No. 138. Argued January 31, 1908, Decided February 24, 1908. Findings of fact in a suit in equity made by both the Circuit Court and th
White-Smith Music Publishing Co. v. Apollo Co.
WHITE-SMITH MUSIC PUBLISHING COMPANY v. APOLLO COMPANY. APPEALS PROM AND CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OP APPEALS POR THE SECOND CIRCUIT. Nos. 110, 111. Argued January 16, 17, 1908. Decided February 24, 1908. While this court is not bound
Herring-Hall-Marvin Safe Co. v. Hall's Safe Co.
HERRING-HALL-MARVIN SAFE COMPANY v. HALL’S SAFE COMPANY. CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE'SIXTH CIRCUIT. No. 136. Argued January 30, 1908. Decided February 24, 1908. Donnell v. Herring-Hall-Marvin Safe Co., ante, pi 267, f
Starr v. Campbell
STARR v. CAMPBELL. ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OP THE UNITED STATES POR-THE ' WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN. No. 132. Argued January 23, 24, 1908. Decided February 24, 1908. The restrictions on the right of alienation óf lands to be allotted
Dick v. United States
DICK v. UNITED STATES. RROR TO THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF IDAHO. No. 62. Submitted December 3, 1907. Decided February 24, 1908. 'While a, State, upon, its admission to the Union, is on an equal footing with
United Dictionary Co. v. G. & C. Merriam Co.
UNITED DICTIONARY COMPANY v. G. & C. MERRIAM COMPANY. J APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT} OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT. No. 129. Argued January 23, 1908. Decided February 3, 1908. The requirement of the Copyright Act of'June 18, 1874, c.
Missouri Valley Land Co. v. Wiese
MISSOURI VALLEY LAND COMPANY v. WIESE. ERROR TO THE SUPREME. COURT OF THE STATE OF NEBRASKA. No. 101.- Argued January 10, 1908. Decided February 3, 1908. Where a judge of the highest court "of a State, in allowing a writ of error, • adds to
Elder v. Wood
ELDER v. WOOD. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF COLORADO. No. 95. Argued January 9, 1908. Decided January 27, 1908. Á valid subsisting mining location, such as the Comstock lode, or an interest therein, is property distinct from t
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.