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
1850 Cases
169 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
Newton v. Stebbins
Isaac Newton, Claimant of Steamboat New Jersey, Appellant, v. John H. Stebbins. Where a sailing vessel was descending'the Hudson River with but a trifling wind, and chiefly by the' force of the current, and came into collision with a steame
St. John v. Paine
Edward B. St. John, Claimant of the Steamboat Neptune, Appellant, v. Zebulon A. Paine, Sarah Norwood, John Bucknam, Andrew Bradford, and Augustus Norton, Libellants. The following are the rules which ought to-govern vessels when approaching
Town of East Hartford v. Hartford Bridge Co.
The Town of East Hartford, Plaintiff in error, v. The Hartford Bridge Company. The decision in the preceding case, between the same parties, affirmed. In error to the Supreme Court of Errors for the State of Connecticut. The facts in this c
Town of East Hartford v. HartFord Bridge Co.
The Town of East Hartford, Plaintiff in error, v. The Hartford Bridge Company. Erom the year 1681 to 1783, a franchise in the ferry over the Connecticut River be-, longed to the town of Hartford, situated on the west bank of the river. In 1
Gayler v. Wilder
Charles J. Gayler and Leonard Brown, Plaintiffs in error, v. Benjamin G. Wilder. After a case has been decided, and judgment pronounced by this court, it is too late to move to open the judgment for the purpose of amending the bill of excep
Gayler v. Wilder
Charles J. Gayler and Leonard Brown, Plaintiffs in error, v. Benjamin G. Wilder. An assignment of a patent right, made and recorded in the Patent-Office before the patent issued, which purported to convey, to the assignee 'all the inchoate
Louisville Manufacturing Co. v. Welch
The Louisville Manufacturing Company, Plaintiff in error, v. Michael Welch. The following guaranty, viz. “ I hereby guaranty the payment of any purchases of bagging and rope, which Thomas Barrett may have occasion to make between this and t
United States v. Brooks
The United States, Plaintiffs in error, v. Jehiel Brooks and others, Defendants. A supplementary article to a treaty between the United States and the Caddo Indians', providing that certain persons “ shall have their right to the said four
Washington, Alexandria, & Georgetown Steam Packet Co. v. Sickles
The Washington, Alexandria, and Georgetown Steam Packet Company, Plaintiffs in error, v. Frederick E. Sickles and Truman Cook. Where the declaration contained two counts; viz. the first upon a special contract that the plaintiffs had placed
Butler v. Pennsylvania
John B. Butler, Levi Reynolds, Junior, and William Overfield, late Board of Canal Commissioners of Pennsylvania, Plaintiffs in error, v. The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. In 1836, the State of Pennsylvania passed a law directing Canal Commi
Baltimore & Susquehanna Railroad v. Nesbit
The Baltimore and Susquehanna Railroad Company, Plaintiff in error, v. Alexander Nesbit and Penelope D. Goodwin. The State of Maryland granted a charter to^. railroad company, in which provision was made for the condemnation of land to the
Philadelphia & Wilmington Railroad v. Maryland
The Philadelphia and Wilmington Railroad Company, Plaintiff in error, v. The State of Maryland. The' Philadelphia, Wilmington, and Baltimore Railroad Company Was formed by the union of several railroad companies' which had been- previously
Landes v. Brant
Isaac Landes, Plaintiff in error, v. Joshua B. Brant. Where the Commissioners who acted under the act of Congress passed on the 3d of March, 1807, for the adjustment of land titles in Missouri, decided in favor of a claim, and issued a cert
Stimpson v. Baltimore & Susquehanna Railroad
James Stimpson, Plaintiff in error, v. The Baltimore and Susquehanna Railroad Company. Stimpson’s patent “ for an improvement for the purpose of carrying railroads through the streets óf towns, or in other situations where it may be desirab
Henderson v. Tennessee
Thomas Henderson and Thomas Calloway, Plaintiffs in error, v. The State of Tennessee. If the defendant in an ejectment suit claims a right to the possession of land derived under a title which springs from a reservation in a treaty between
Barnard v. Adams
Charles Barnard, Abel Adams, George M. Barnard, and Charles Larkin, Plaintiffs in error, v. Joseph Adams, Andrew H. Bennet, and Joseph Fletcher. It was a proper case for contribution in general average for the loss of a vessel where there w
Gilmer v. Poindexter
James B. Gilmer, Plaintiff in error, v. George Poindexter. On the 30th of January, 1835, Poindexter purchased from Thomas a right of entry in certain lands in Louisiana, with authority to locate the lands in the name of Thomas, and they wer
Maxwell v. Griswold
Hugh Maxwell, Plaintiff in error, v. Nathaniel L. Griswold, George Griswold, George W. Gray, and George Griswold, Junior. The points ruled in the preceding case of Greely v. Thompson and Forman adopted and applied to this case also, so far
Greely v. Thompson
Philip Greely, Junior, Plaintiff in error, v. William Thompson and William Henry Forman, Merchants and Copartners, trading under the Style and Firm of Thompson and Forman, Aliens and Residents of London, Defendants. In an action brought aga
Trigg v. Drew
James Trigg, Richard Pryor, and John W. Paup, Plaintiffs in error, v. Thomas S. Drew, as Governor of the State of Arkansas, and successor of Archibald Yell, deceased. The decision, in the preceding case of Paup et al. v. Drew again affirmed
Paup v. Drew
John W. Paup, James Trigg, and Richard Pryor, Plaintiffs in error, v. Thomas S. Drew, as Governor of the State of Arkansas, and successor of Archibald Yell, deceased. The decision of the court in the preceding case of Woodruff y. Trapnall a
Woodruff v. Trapnall
William E. Woodruff, Plaintiff in error, v. Frederick W. Trapnall. In 1836, the legislature >of Arkansas chartered a bank, the whole of the capital of which belonged to the State, and the president and directors of which w.ero appointed by
Sears v. Eastburn
Sherburne Sears, Plaintiff in error, v. Joseph R. Eastburn. The act bf Congress passed in May, 1828 (4 Stat. at Large, 278),'directs'that the forms and modes of proceeding in the courts of the United States, in suits at common law in the St
Hallett v. Collins
William R. Hallett and Robert L. Walker, Executors of Joshua Kennedy, deceased, John G. Aikin and Clarissa his Wife, John H. Hastie and his Wife Secluda, Augustus R. Meslier and his Wife, Mary Augusta Kennedy, Joshua Kennedy, James Inerarit
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.