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
Ryan v. Koch
Ryan v. Koch. A judgment affirmed because the plaintiff in error had filed no assignment of errors or brief, as required by the rules of court.
Marin v. Lalley
Marin v. Lalley. 1. The order of seizure and sale called “ executory process,” made in Louisiana when the mortgage “ imports a confession of judgment,” is in substance a decree of foreclosure and sale, .and therefore a “ final decree;” espe
United States v. Hickey
United States v. Hickey. 1. When the Court of Claims, on a claim embracing several items, rejects " some but allows others, against which allowance the United States alone appeals, this court will not give consideration to the items rejecte
Cordova v. Hood
Cordova v. Hood. 1. Where a deed of land shows on its face that the consideration is yet “to be paid,” a second purchaser (that is to say, a purchaser from the vendee), who has notice of the deed, take£ the land in those States (of which Te
In re the United States
Ex parte: In the matter of the United States. T. The power of the Court of Claims, under the second section of the act of June 25th, 1868,'to grant a now trial in favor of the-United States, .if moved for within two years next after the fin
Olcott v. Supervisors
Olcott v. The Supervisors. 1. This court wilp follow, as of obligation, the decisions of the State courts only on local questions peculiar to thepiselves, or on questions respecting the construction of their own constitution and laws. 2. "W
Railroad Co. v. County of Otoe
Railroad Company v. County of Otoe. 1. Unless restrained by a constitutional prohibition,of some sort, the legislature of a State may properly authorize’ a county to aid, by issuing’its bonds, and giving them as a donation to a railroad com
St. Joseph Township v. Rogers
St. Joseph Township v. Rogers. A statute of Illinois, by a twelfth section, authorized any township along the route of a railroad named, to subscribe to its stock ; But enacted by a thirteenth, that no subscription should be made until noti
Crapo v. Kelly
Crapo v. Kelly. ,A. of Massachusetts, owning a ship then on the high seas hound for the port of New York, hut registered in Massachusetts, applied to the insolvent court of Massachusetts for the benefit of the insolvent laws of the State, a
Railway Co. v. Prescott
Railway Company v. Prescott. 1. The.proviso in the 21st section of the act of July 4th, 1864, amendatory of- the act of July 1st, 1862, to aid the Kansas Pacific Bailway in the •Construction of its road, requiring the prepayment of the cost
Wager v. Hall
Wager et al. v. Hall. 1. The transfer by a debtor who is insolvent, of his property, or a considerable portion of it, to one creditor as a security for a pre-existing debt, . without making any provision for an equal distribution of its pro
Walbrun v. Babbitt
Walbrun v. Babbitt. 1. When on the undisputed parts of a case a verdict is clearly right, so that if a nsvapenire were awarded .the same verdict would have to be given, a court w4H not reverse because on-some disputed points a charge may ha
Water Co. v. Ware
Water Company v. Ware. Where an incorporated company undertook to lay water-pipes in a city, agreeing that it would “ protect.all persons against damages by reason of excavations made by them in laying pipes, and to be responsible for all d
Specht v. Howard
Specht v. Howard et al. 1. Where improper evidence has been suffered by the court to get before the • jury, it is properly afterwards Withdrawn from it. 2. On a suit by the indorsee of a negotiable note which has.no place of payment specifi
Smith v. McCool
Smith v. McCool. 'Where in ejectment a special verdict has been found and judgment entered on it in the court below, for the plaintiff, which judgment, in an appellate court, is set aside with directions to enter judgment for the defendant,
Marshall v. Knox
Marshall v. Knox. 1. The District Court sitting in bankruptcy has no jurisdiction to proceed .by rule to take goods seized, before any act of bankruptcy by the lessees, for rent due by them in Louisiana, under “ a writ of provisional seizur
Mitchell v. Hawley
Mitchell v. Hawley. •A. patentee of certain machines, whose original patent had still between six and seven years to run, conveyed to another person the “ right to make and use and to license to others the right to make and use four .of the
Beall v. New Mexico
Beall v. New Mexico. 1. A statute authorizing judgment against'the'sureties of an appeal bond, - as well as against the appellants, in case of affirmance, is not unconstitutional. ■ 2. A Territorial legislature, having by its organic act po
Steamboat Co. v. Chase
Steamboat Company v. Chase. A statute of a State giving to the next of kin of a person crossing upon one of its public highways with reasonable care, and killed by a common carrier by means of steamboats, an action on the case for damages f
Tweed's Case
Tweed’s Case. A person having entered, January 23d, 1866, into a contract with the government to purchase, as its agent, “ cotton which formerly belonged to the so-called ‘Confederate States’ now in the possession of individuals in the Red,
Planters' Bank v. Union Bank
Planters’ Bank v. Union Bank. Union Bank v. Planters’ Bank. 1. A military commander commanding the department in which the city of Hew Orleans was situate, had not the right, on the 17th of August, 1863, after the occupation of the city by
Osborne v. Mobile
Osborne v. Mobile. The State of Georgia-chartered a company to transact a general forwarding and express business. The company had a business office at Mobile, in Alabama, and there did an express business which extended within and beyond t
Morgan v. Parham
Morgan v. Parham. 1. When a vessel is regularly registered in the port to which she belongs, that is to say, “ in the port nearest to which her owner, husband, or acting and managing owner usually resides” [registered, ex. gr., at New York]
Kenicott v. Supervisors
Kenicott v. The Supervisors. 1. A legislative act chartering a railroad company and authorizing the construction of a railroad between certain points, authorized, by its 7th, 8th, and 9th sections, the company to borrow money, and authorize
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.