Find court opinions that match your case.
Search 244,079+ 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
1874 Cases
197 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
Lee County v. Clews
LEE COUNTY v. CLEWS. ERROR TO THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA. No. 79. Argued aud submitted November 30, 1874. Decided December 21, 1874. Chambers County v. Clews, 21 Wall. 317, followed. Mr. R. T.
Northwestern Union Packet Co. v. Viles
NORTHWESTERN UNION PACKET CO. v. VILES. ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN. No. 70. Argued and submitted November 17 and 18, 1874. Decided December 7, 1874. Northwestern Union Packet Co. v.
American Wood-Paper Co. v. Fibre Disintegrating Co.
The Wood-Paper Patent. The American Wood-Paper Co. v. The Fibre Disintegrating Co. The Fibre Disintegrating Co. v. The American Wood-Paper Co. 1. A manufacture or a product of a process may be no novelty, and, therefore, unpatentable; while
Collar Co. v. Van Dusen
Collar Company v. Van Dusen. 1. The purpose of a reissue is to render effectual the actual invention for which the original patent should have been granted, not to introduce new features. Therefore, in an application for reissue parol testi
Tremaine v. Hitchcock & Co.
The Tremolo Patent. Tremaine v. Hitchcock & Co. Hitchcock & Co. v. Tremaine. 1. An amendment which changed the character of a bill, allowed even after final decree, the circumstances being peculiar and the cause having been, in fact, tried
United States v. Shrewsbury
United States v. Shrewsbury. Where, under a contract entered into between the government and a transporter of military stores, in the wilds of the West, it was provided that a board of survey, composed of military officers, should on the ar
Railroad Co. v. Wiswall
Railroad Company v. Wiswall. The order of a Circuit Court remanding, for want of jurisdiction to hear it, a case removed from a State court into it, is not a “ final judgment ” in that sense which authorizes a writ of error. The remedy of t
Ex parte Medway
Ex parte Medway. Where on certain facts found by the Court of Claims — it refusing to find as a fact a certain allegation which the petitioner in the suit requested it to find — that court has given judgment against the petitioner, and the
Moran v. Prather
Moran et al. v. Prather. 1. Where a firm, with several persons styling themselves, as a firm in this ease did, “ creditors of the steamboat B.,” agreed to release P. (owner of parts of the boat, the rest being owned by two other persons) “
Green v. Green
Green v. Green. Where a husband and wife conveyed lands in trust for the sole and separate use of the wife and for the children of the two parties, during the wife’s life in absolute property, as if she were a feme sole, and free and clear
Hepburn v. School Directors
Hepburn v. The School Directors. 1. Under the act of Congress of February 10th, 1868, enacting that the legislature of each State may direct the manner of taxing all the shares of National banks located within said State, subject to the res
Grand Tower Co. v. Phillips
Grand Tower Company v. Phillips et al. A company having coal-mines at a place on the Mississippi, eighty miles above Cairo, agreed to deliver 150,000 tons of coal, the product of its mines, to P. & S., at $3 a ton during the year 1870, in e
Lewis v. Cocks
Lewis v. Cocks. 1. A bill in equity is not the proper means to recover possession of land, there being no fraud in the ease, nor other matter specially the subject of equitable cognizance, and a party cannot by any colorable suggestion of f
The Rio Grande
The Rio Grande. 1. In a proceeding in rem, a valid seizure and actual control of the res by the marshal gives jurisdiction, and an improper removal of it from his custody, as by an order of court improvidently made, does not destroy the jur
Crosby v. Buchanan
Crosby v. Buchanan. 1. A., in 1812, made a deed to V. conveying to him valuable estates, Y. by a separate instrument, agreeing that if A. would, within live years, pay to him a certain sum ($14,500), he would convey to A.’s children, then i
Fashnacht v. Frank
Fashnacht v. Frank. Where in a suit pending before it a State court dissolves an injunction (previously granted by it on an allegation by the mortgagor, that the mortgagee had agreed to give him further time) against proceeding to sell mort
United States v. Williamson
United States v. Williamson. An officer of the army who is ordered, even on his own request, to proceed to a particular place, including his home, and “ there await orders,” reporting thence by letter to the Adjutant-General of the Army and
Railroad Co. v. Swasey
Railroad Company v. Swasey. 1. A decree of foreclosure and sale is not “final” in the sense which allows an appeal from it so long as the amount due upon the debt must be determined, and the property to be sold ascertained and defined. 2. H
Donovan v. United States
Donovan v. United States. Surveyors of ports performing the duties of collectors of the customs in ports other than those ports enumerated in the fifth section of the act of May 7th, 1822 (3 Stat. at Large, 693), that is to say of ports oth
Smythe v. Fiske
Smythe v. Fiske. Under the Tariff Act of July 30th, 1864 (13 Stat. at Large, 210), “silk ties” are chargeable with a duty of 50 per cent, ad valorem. They fall under the closing words of the eighth section of that act which enacts “ that on
Smith v. Adsit
Smith v. Adsit. Where a complainant alleging himself to be a bond fide purchaser, and setting out a case in the highest State court for equitable relief against a sale to other parties xvhich'an owner of land had undertaken to make, alleged
Reedy v. Scott
Reedy v. Scott. 1. Though as a general rule suits for infringement of a patent, are defeated by the surrender of the patent, and a new original bill — not a supplemental bill — is the proper sort of bill by which to proceed for an infringem
Scholey v. Rew
Scholey v. Rew. 1. The “succession tax,” imposed by the acts of June 30th, 1864, and July 13th, 1866, on every “devolution of title to any real estate,” was not a “direct tax,” within the meaning of the Constitution; but an “impost or excis
Slack v. Tucker & Co.
Slack v. Tucker & Co. 1 Under the seventy-ninth section of the Internal Revenue Act of 1864, as amended by the act of July 13th, 1866 (14 Statutes at Large), persons who sell goods in their own name, at their own store, on commission, and h
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.