Find court opinions that match your case.
Search 312,996+ 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
1818 Cases
37 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
United States v. Palmer
The United States v. Palmer et al. A robbcry committed on the high seas, although such robbery if com., milled on land would not by the lav s of the United Surtes bo punishable with death, is piracy under the 8th section of the act of 1700»
Ross v. Triplett
(practice.) Ross v. Triplett. Thta court .tuis no jurisdiction of causes brought before it,-upon .certificate of a division of opinions of the judges of tho circuit court for the.District of Columbia. Tlief. appellate jut isdicliori ofthis
Craig v. Radford
(chancery.) Craig et al. v. Radford. 'If, under tho Virginia land law, tlio warrant Blast be lodged irti tTiff office of the surveyor at the time when th.q,. survey is made, his Certificate, stating that the survey was made by virtue of tho
Craig v. Leslie
(Chancery;) Craig v. Leslie et al. ■ft. C., a citizen of Virginia, being seized of real property in that Mato, made his will: “In the first place 1 give, devise, amt bequeath unto J. L.” and four others, ‘‘all my estate, real and personal,
The Amiable Nancy
(prize. The Amiable Nancy. The district courts of the United States'have jurisdiction of queci(iohs of prize, and its incidents, independent of the special provisions of the- prize act of tho 26th June, 1812, eh.- 430. (CV1I. J tfa an illeg
Murray's Lessee v. Baker
(Common Law.) Murray’s Lessee v. Baker et al. Tha terms “ beyond seas,” in the proviso or saving clause of a statute of limitations, are equivalent to without the limits of the State where the statute is enacted ; and the party who is witho
Burton's Lessee v. Williams
(local law.) Burton’s Lessee v. Williams et al. The f fate of North Carolina, by her act of cession of the western land* of 1789, ch. 3. recited in the act of congress of 1790, eh. 33. ac* cepting that cession, and by her act of 1803. ch. 3
Lenox v. Prout
(CuANCSKTbJ Lenox et al. v. Prout. íbe endorser of s promissory note, w hi> h.is been chargfd by doe no" Vice of :he default of ihe maker, is no« en ¡lied to he protect ion of a ■ court of oquit) aa n surety ; the holder may proceed against
Evans v. Eaton
(common law.) Evans v. Eaton. Under life fi.tb.section of the patent law of 1793, ch; 156. the defend,ant pleaded the general issue, and. gave notice that tie woulq prove at Jim'trial, that the machine, for l he use of which, without licens
Brown v. Jackson
[Common Law.) Brown v. Jackson. Although the grantees in a deed executed after, but recorded' Before, another conveyance of the same land, being bond fide purchasers without notice, are by law deemed to possess the better titleyet where L.
The Anne
(Pbize.) The Anne, Barnabeu, Claimant. The captors are competent witnesses upon an order for farther. proof, where the benefit- of it is extended to both parties. The captors are always competent' witnesses, as to the circumslancec of the c
The Atalanta
(Prize.) The Atalanta.—Foussat Claimant. AAeuttral cargo found on board an armed er emv’s vessel is not fiable to condemnation as prize of war. A question of proprietary interest. Farther proof ordered. Appeal from the circuit Court for the
Houston v. Moore
(Practice.) Houston v. Moore fha court has no' jurisdiction under the 25th section of the judiciary sett' of 1789, cb. 20; linio» the judgment, or decree, óf th* etatecourt.be ■¿final judgment or decree. A judgment reversing that of jan inf
The Æolus
(IiwtTance Court.) The Æolus—Weed, Claimant. A question of fact under the non-importation laws. Dcfenca, set Up on the -plea of distress', repellad. Condemnation. Appeal front the circuit court for the district of Massachusetts. This vessel
Gelston v. Hoyt
(Constitutional and Common Law.) Gelston, et al. v. Hoyt. Under the judiciary act of 1789', ch. 20. s. 25. giving appellato jurisdiction to iha supreme court of the United States, from the fina! , judgment or decree bf the highest court of
The Fortuna
(Prize.) The Fortuna.—Krause et al. Claimants. A question of proprietary interest, and concealment of papers. Farther, proof ordered, open to both parties. On the production of farther proof by the claimant, condemnation pronounced. • TfVhe
Hampton v. M'Connel
(Constitutional Law.) Hampton v. M'Connel. A judgment of a state court has the samo credit, validity, and effect in every other court within the United States, which it had in the state whore it was rendered; and whatever pleas would be goo
United States v. 150 Crates of Earthen Ware
(Instance Court.,) The United States v. 150 Crates of Earthen Ware. Libel for a forfeiture of goods imported, and alleged to have been in” v.oiced at a less sum than the actual cost at the place of exportation, with design to evade the duti
Dunlop v. Hepburn
(Chancery.)' Dunlop v. Hepburn, et al. IhpíaAalion of the decree in this cause, (reported ante; Vol. I. p. 719'. that.the defendants were only to be accountable ' for the rent* and' profits'of the lauds, referred'to in’the proceedings; actu
Robinson v. Campbell
(constitutional .AND Xocal law.) Robinson v. Campbell. the compact of Í802, settling the boundary lina'between Virginia trait Tennessee, and the laws made in pursuance thereof, it is declared that •all claims and titles to lands derived, fr
United States v. Bevans
(Constitutional Law.) The United States v. Bevans. Admitting that the 3d article of the constitution of the United States, which declares that “ the judicial power shall extend to all cases ot admiraltv and maritime jurisdiction,” vests in
Patton v. Nicholson
(common law. Patton v. Nicholson. On* ehiaeB-of the United .States hi* no right to purchase of,or nil to Mother, a- license or pans f{om the public enemy, to harped onf hoard an Amerioah vessel. Error to the circuit court, of the district o
Shepherd v. Hampton
(Common Law.) Shepherd et al. v. Hampton. In an action by the vendee for the breach erf a contract ofsqlb oy the vendor, in not delivering the .articlo, the measure of damage ¡8 the price of the article at the time of the breach of the cont
Olivera v. Union Insurance
(Common Law.) Olivera v. The Union Insurance Company. A vessel within a port, blockaded after the commencement of her voy- . age, and prevented from proceeding on it, sustains, a loss by a peril tvithin that clause of the policy insuring ag
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.