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
1872 Cases
174 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
Rodd v. Heartt
Rodd v. Heartt. 1. A district judge, sitting as the Circuit Court, may allow an appeal from his own decree. 2. Where the claim on a fund in the Registry of the Admiralty of several mortgages secured in a body by one mortgage, exceeds $2000,
Allen v. Massey
Allen v. Massey. 1. Under the statute of frauds of Missouri, as interpreted by the highest court of that State, an interpretation which this court will follow, a sale of household furniture in a house occupied jointly by vendor and vendee,
Hume v. Beale's Executrix
Hume v. Beale’s Executrix. 1. Although a former suit about the same subject-matter as a later one may not operate strictly as res adjudicata, yet it may well be referred to when it wa3 heard'On the scene of the transaction complained of, an
United States v. Railroad Co.
United States v. Railroad Company. The tax provided .for in the 122d section of the Internal Revenue Act of. June 30th, 1864, as subsequently amended, in which section it is enacted that railroad and certain other companies specified, “ ind
Barnes v. The Railroads
Barnes v. The Railroads. The one hundred and sixteenth section of the Internal Eevenue Act of June 30th, 1864, amended by the act of March 2d, 1867, laid a tax of 5 per cent, on incomes derived from any source whatever. The one hundred and
Tyler v. Magwire
Tyler v. Magwire. The Supreme Court of the State of Missouri, on appeal, dismissed a petition which sought to have the title to lands held by the defendant, under a patent from the United States, divested, and vested in the complainant. Ero
Holden v. Joy
Holden v. Joy. 1. The treaty of the 29th-December, 1835, between the United States and the Cherokee Indiáns, was not made in virtue of the act of 28th of May, 1830, authorizing an “ exchange” of lands west of .the Mississippi, for _ the ter
Allen v. United States
Allen et al. v. United States. 1. A demand by the United States for the proceeds of Indian trust bonds, unlawfully converted to their own use by persons who had illegally procured and sold them, and had afterwards become wholly insolvent, i
Lapeyre v. United States
Lapeyre v. United States. 1. A proclamation of the President relieving parties who had been transacting business in ignorance of it, from penalties, and restoring to them their rights of property, held, under special circumstances, by the j
Collector v. Beggs
The Collector v. Beggs. Under the 20th section of the act of July 20th, 1868, entitled “An act imposing taxes on distilled spirits,” &e., in the absence of a distiller’s having appealed to the Commissioner of Internal Revenue (as under the
United States v. Cook
United States v. Cook. 1. Where a statute defining an offence contains an exception, in the enacting clause of the statute, which is so incorporated with the language defining the offence, that the ingredients of the offence cannot be accur
Homestead Co. v. Valley Railroad
Homestead Company v. Valley Railroad. 1. In. this case the court decides, for the fifth time, that neither the State of Iowa nor any railroad company for whose benefit the act of Congress of May 15th, 1850 (11 Stat. at Large, 9), was made,
Williams v. Baker
Williams v. Baker. Cedar Rapids Railroad Co. v. Des Moines Navigation Co. X. The history given of the legislation of the land grants for the improvement of the Des Moines River, and of the grants for railroad purposes, which have been suppo
Goddard v. Foster
Goddard v. Foster. 1. A., at Valparaiso, was the agent, under an agreement of May 7th, 1849, of B., at Boston, who was sending him adventures and shipments of goods, he selling the goods and investing the proceeds in othe'r merchandise cons
Oulton v. Savings Institution
Oulton v. Savings Institution. 1. ’ Under the >10th section of the internal revenue act of 1864, as amended by the act of July 13th, 1866, taxing deposits in hanks, an entry made -in the depositor’s pass-book of a deposit or payment, is “ a
Bailey v. Railroad Co.
Bailey v. Railroad Company. A railroad company "with stockholders and bondholders, being much embarrassed, put before the latter apian, by which they should surrender a part of their bonds and receive preferred stock theref or; the same to
Averill v. Smith
Averill v. Smith. Trespass will not lie against a collector of internal revenue for improperly-seizing and carding away goods as forfeited, where, on information after-wards filed the marshal has returned that he has seized and' attached th
Harwood v. Railroad Co.
Harwood v. Railroad Company. 1. Where a bill is filed by a third party to set aside as fraudulent completed judicial proceedings, regular on their face, the plaintiff' in those proceedings should be brought in as a party. 2. Where such a bi
Sweeny v. United States
Sweeny v. United States. The doctrine of United States v. Clyde (13 Wallace, 35), of Mason v. United States {supra, p. 67), and of other cases, affirmed, and the doctrine re-declared and applied, that where a claim is disputed by. the gover
Mason v. United States
Mason v. United States. The United States offered to A. an order for 50,000 muskets on certain terms, specified, with an agreement that 100,000 would be received if delivered within a time named. A. accepted the offer, and laid out a large
Ex parte Warmouth
Ex parte Warmouth. 1. Where the Circuit Court of the United States proceeds to exercise jurisdiction under the twenty-third section of the act of 31st May, 1870, entitled “An act to enforce the rights of citizens of the United States to vot
Olcott v. Bynum
Olcott v. Bynum et al. Under the statutes of North Carolina regulating the conveyance of real estate in that State, no copy of a registered copy of k deed can be read in .evidence in'place of the original, even if it be proved that the orig
Branson v. Wirth
Branson v. Wirth. The government, as appeared by the exemplification of the record of a patent, had granted, January 10th, 1818, to A. the northeast quarter of a certain tract of land, in pursuance confessedly of a warrant and location upon
The Nuestra Señora de Regla
The Nuestra Señora de Regla. 1. In prize eases, wherever it appears that notice of appeal or of intention to appeal to this court was filed with the clerk of the District Court within thirty days next after the final decree therein, an appe
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.