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
1863 Cases
78 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
Gregg v. Von Phul
Gregg v. Von Phul. 1. "Whether a contract to give a deed with “ full covenants of seizure and warranty, ” is answered hy a deed containing a covenant that the grantor is “lawfully seized in fee simple, and that he will warrant and defend th
Seybert v. City of Pittsburg
Seybert v. City of Pittsburg. An authority given by act of legislature to a city corporation to subscribe for stock in a railway company, “ as fully as any individual,” authorizes also the issue by the city of its negotiable bonds in paymen
Sturgis v. Clough
Sturgis v. Clough. Although tho language of a decree in admiralty may declare a decision which might not, if it were construed by its exact words, bo capable of being supported, still, if it is obvious from subsequent parts of the record th
Dunham v. Cincinnati, Peru, &c., Railway Co.
Dunham v. The Cincinnati, Peru, &c., Railway Company. 1. A mortgage by a railway company of their ‘ ‘ road, built and to be built, ’ ’— the company, at the date of their mortgage, having built a part of their road, but not built the residue
Ex parte Vallandigham
Ex parte Vallandigham. The Supreme Court of the United States has no power to review by certiorari the proceedings of a military commission ordered by a general officer of the United States Army, commanding a military department. This case
Baldwin v. Bank of Newbury
Baldwin v. Bank of Newbury. The case of Baldwin v. Hale (arde, p. 223) affirmed. "Where negotiable paper is drawn to a person by name, with addition of “ Cashier” to his name, but with no designation of the particular bank of which he was c
Baldwin v. Hale
Baldwin v. Hale. A discharge obtained under the insolvent law of one State is not a bar to an action on a note given in and payable in the same State; the party to whom the note was given having been and being of a different State, and not
Same v. Same
Same v. Same. No. 79. 1. Where some parts of a contract are illegal while others are legal, the legal may he separated from the illegal, if there be no imputation of malum in se; and if the good part show a sufficient cause of action, it is
Same v. Same
Same v. Same. No. 81. A statute which enacts that whenever any railroad company “shall have received or may hereafter receive the bonds of any city or county upon subscriptions of stock by such city or county, such bonds may bear an interes
Gelpcke v. City of Dubuque
Gelpcke et al. v. The City of Dubuque. 1. By a series of decisions of the Supreme Court of Iowa prior to that, A.D. 1859, in The State of Iowa, ex relatione, v. The County of Wapello (13 Iowa, 388), the right of the legislature of that Stat
Sweeny v. Easter
Sweeny et al. v. Easter. 1. The indorsement of negotiable paper with the words “for collection,” restrains its negotiability; and a party who has thus indorsed it, is competent to prove that ho was not the owner of it, and did not mean to g
Jones v. Morehead
Jones et al. v. Morehead. 1. Tfie claim of Sherwood, under his patent, granted in 1842, and extended in 1856, for “a new and useful improvement in door-loclcs” — so far as the claim is for “making the cases of door-locks and latches double-
Bridge Proprietors v. Hoboken Co.
The Bridge Proprietors v. The Hoboken Company. 1. Where a statute of a State creates a contract, and a subsequent statute is alleged to impair the obligation of that contract, and the highest court of law or equity in the State construes th
Minnesota v. Bachelder
The State of Minnesota v. Bachelder. 1. Neither the Act of Congress of 3d March, 1849 — the organic law of the Territory of Minnesota, which declared that when the public lands in that Territory shall be surveyed, certain sections, designat
United States v. Sepulveda
United States v. Sepulveda. 1. Previous to the act of Cbngress of June 14th, 1860, the District Courts of the United States for California had no jurisdiction to supervise and correct the action of the Surveyor-General of California, in sur
Burr v. Des Moines Railroad & Navigation Co.
Burr v. The Des Moines Railroad and Navigation Company. 1. Although this court will give judgment, on error, upon an agreed statement of facts or case stated, if it he signed by counsel and spread upon the record at large, as part thereof,
Bayne v. Morris
Bayne v. Morris. 1. "Where an award made under submission by parties plaintiff and defendant to that effect, awards that one party shall pay to the other a certain sum on one day specified, another sum on another day specified, and that to
Mercer County v. Hacket
Mercer County v. Hacket. 1. Where a county issues its bonds payable to bearer, and solemnly pledges the faith, credit and property of the county, under the authority of an act of Assembly, referred to on the face of the bonds by date, for t
Gaylords v. Kelshaw
Gaylords v. Kelshaw et al. 1. In a bill to set aside a conveyance as made without consideration and in fraud of creditors, the alleged fraudulent grantor is a necessary defendant in the bill; and if being made defendant his citizenship is n
Eames v. Godfrey
Eames v. Godfrey. Where a patent is for a combination of distinct and designated parts, it is not infringed by a combination which varies from that patented, in the omission of one of the operative parts and the substitution therefor of ano
Orchard v. Hughes
Orchard v. Hughes. Id. v. Id. t. It is no defence to a suit for debt tbat tbe debt arose from tbe receipt of tbe bills of a bank that was chartered illegally and for fraudulent purposes, and that tbe bills were void in law, and finally prov
Ex parte Dubuque & Pacific Railroad
Ex parte Dubuque and Pacific Railroad. "When this court, under the 24th section of the Judiciary Act, reverses a judgment on a case stated and brought here on error, remanding the case, with a mandate to the court below to enter judgment fo
Ryan v. Bindley
Ryan v. Bindley. 1. Where a declaration claims a sum not sufficiently large to warrant error to this court, but where the plea pleads a set-off of a sum so considerable that the excess between the sum claimed and that pleaded as a set-off w
Dermott v. Wallach
Dermott v. Wallach. "Where a lease at $8000 a year, payable in monthly instalments, stipulated that if the tenant underlet or attempted to remove any of the goods on the premises without the landlord’s consent, then, at the sole option and
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.