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
1869 Cases
181 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
Jones v. Bolles
Jones v. Bolles. .. Equity has always jurisdiction of fraud, misrepresentation, and concealment, and this does not depend on discovery. 2. Where an agreement against which a complainant in equity asks to have relief, is perpetual in its nat
National Bank v. Commonwealth
National Bank v. Commonwealth. 1. The right of the States to tax the shares of the National banks reaffirmed. 2. The statute of Kentucky (set forth in the statement of the case), taxing bank stock, levies a tax on the shares of the stockhol
Bigelow v. Forrest
Bigelow v. Forrest. 1. The act of March 23d, 1863, “ relating to Habeas Corpus, and regulating judicial proceedings in certain cases,” applies only to suits for acts done or omitted to be done during the rebellion. 2. It does not apply to a
Bennett v. Hunter
Bennett v. Hunter. 1. The act of 5th August, 1861, “ To provide increased revenue from imports, to pay interest on the public debt, and for other purposesand the act of June 7th, 1862, “for the collection of direct taxes, in insurrectionary
Lynch v. Bernal
Lynch et al. v. Bernal et al. i. The Board of Commissioners created under the act of Congress, entitled “ An act to ascertain and settle private land claims in the State of California,” passed'March 3d, 1851, had jurisdiction of a claim mad
Secretary v. McGarrahan
The Secretary v. McGarrahan. 1. The Commissioner of the Land Office cannot properly grant a patent under the 7th section of the act of July, 1866, “ to quiet land titles in California,” unless the purchaser bring himself by affirmative proo
Lobrano v. Nelligan
Lobrano v. Nelligan. Although by the general law of Louisiana a father’s guardianship of his minor children imports a mortgage on his immovable property in their favor, yet this mortgage does not make such a contract between the guardian to
Burnett v. Caldwell
Burnett v. Caldwell. 1. Where a purchaser of real estate fails to comply with the terms of the contract under which he obtained possession,- the vendor is at liberty to treat the contract as rescinded, and to regain the possession by ejectm
Public Schools v. Walker
Public Schools v. Walker 1. The act of Congress of July 27th, 1831, relinquishes to the State of Missouri the lots, commons, &c., reserved for the use of schools by the act of- June 12th, 1812, and nothing else. 2. The act of 1812 excluded
Justices v. Murray
The Justices v. Murray. 1. The provision in the seventh amendment of the Constitution of the United States, which declares that no fact tried by a jury shall be otherwise re-examined in any court of the United States than according to the r
Swain v. Seamens
Swain v. Seamens. 1. A contract to build, on a lot sold upon mortgage, a mill fifty feet wide by one hundred and fifty long, is not, as a proposition of law, substantially complied with by building one that is seventy-eight feet wide by a h
Barney v. Schmeider
Barney v. Schmeider. 1. It is not sufficient to sustain a verdict for the plaintiff, that the testimony on which it was founded was known to the court by whom the jury was charged to find such a verdict. The evidence must be submitted to th
Ex parte Zellner
Ex parte Zellner. Where an act of Congress gives, as part of the general system of organization of a court, an appeal from any final judgment or decree which may hereafter be rendered by it, an appeal lies from a judgment rendered under an
Linthicum v. Ray
Linthicum v. Ray. 1. The possession of a wharf by the defendant under color and with claim of title is sufficient to put the plaintiff, in an action on the case for obstructing him in its use, upon proof of a better title to the wharf, or,
Steamboat Burns
Steamboat Burns. 1. A writ of error or appeal to this court cannot be sustained in the name of a steamboat, or any other than a human being, or some corporate or associated aggregation of persons. 2. The acts of the State legislatures autho
Star of Hope
Star of Hope. 1. To constitute a voluntary stranding of a vessel it is not necessary that there should have been a previous intention to destroy or injure tha vessel, nor is such intention supposed to exist. It is sufficient that the vessel
Hickman v. Jones
Hickman v. Jones et al. 1. A prosecution in a so-called “court of the Confederate States of America,” for treason, in aiding the troops of the United States in the prosecution of a miltary expedition against the said Confederate States, .is
Frisbie v. Whitney
Frisbie v. Whitney. 1. Occupation and improvement on the public lands with a view to preemption, do not confer a vested right in the land so occupied. 2. It does confer a preference over others in the purchase of such land by the bond fide
In re Howard
In the matters of Howard. 1. Where there is a fund in court to be distributed among different claimants, a decree of distribution will not preclude a claimant not embraced in its provisions, but, having rights similar to those of other clai
The Harriman
The Harriman. Performance of a contract of charter-party to proceed to a distant port specified, made during a war and for the obvious purpose of furnishing articles to one of the parties to it, held not dispensed with by the fact, learned
Bonner v. United States
Bonner v. United States. The United States cannot be sued in the Court of Claims upon equitable considerations merely. Hence the holder of a military bounty-land ' warrant can have no legal right through that court, against the United State
The Johnson
The Johnson. S‘.earners navigating in crowded channels and in the vicinity of wharves, must be run and managed with great caution, and with a strict regard to the established rules of navigation, including that one which requires them, when
Latham's & Deming's Appeals
Latham’s and Deming’s Appeals. An appellant has a right to have his appeal dismissed notwithstanding the opposition of the other side. These were two appeals from the Court of Claims, in suits against the United States. They had been passed
The Grapeshot
The Grapeshot. 1. When, during the late civil war, portions of the insurgent territory were occupied by tbe National forces, it was within the constitutional authority of the President, as commander-in-chief, to establish therein provisiona
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.