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
1875 Cases
203 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
Atherton v. Fowler
ATHERTON v. FOWLER. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OE THE STATE OE CALIFORNIA. No. 648. Submitted November 16,1876. Decided December 6, 1875. Atherton v. Fowler, 91 U. S. 143, followed. Mr. M. Blair for plaintiffs in error. Mr. M. A. Wheaton fo
Eliza Hancox v. Langdon
THE ELIZA HANCOX v. LANGDON. APPEAL PROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA. No. 36. Argued November 9 and 10, 1875. Decided November 15, 1875. The decree below is affirmed on the facts. Mr. E. G. Be
Newhall v. Sanger
Newhall v. Sanger. 1. The act of July 1,1862 (12 Stat. 492), grants to the Western Pacific Railroad Company every alternate section of public land designated by odd numbers within the limits of ten miles on each side of its road, not sold,
Leavenworth, Lawrence, & Galveston Railroad v. United States
Leavenworth, Lawrence, and Galveston Railroad Company v. United States. 1. Where rights claimed under the United States are set up against it, they must be so clearly defined that there can be no question of the purpose of Congress to confe
Hall v. Weare
Hall et al. v. Weare. 1. In a suit upon acceptances amounting to $4,500, the defendants pleaded as a set-off the plaintiff’s draft for a like sum, which has been indorsed to them by A., the payee thereof, and protested for non-payment. The
Hammond v. Mason & Hamlin Organ Co.
Hammond et al. v. Mason and Hamlin Organ Company. 1. A contract concerning the nse of a patented invention bound the “ parties and their legal representatives to the covenants and agreements of the contract.” A plea alleged that the defenda
McStay v. Friedman
McStay et al. v. Friedman. Where, in ejectment for a part of the lands confirmed to the city of San Francisco by an act of Congress, the validity and operative effect of which were not questioned, the judgment of the Supreme Court of the St
Burdell v. Denig
Burdell et al. v. Denig et al. 1. In oases where profits are the proper measure of damages for the infringement of a patent, such profits as the infringer has made, or ought to have made, govern, and not those which the plaintiff" can show
Rector v. United States
HOT SPRINGS CASES. Rector v. United States; Hale v. United States; Gaines et al. v. United States; Russell v. United States. 1. The third section of an act of Congress, approved April 20,1832 (4 Stat. 60S), which is still in force, enacts t
The " Alabama " & the " Game-cock."
The “ Alabama ” and the “ Game-cock.” Where a collision occurs at sea, each vessel being at fault, and damage is thereby done to an innocent party, a decree should be rendered, not against both vessels in solido for the entire damage, inter
Garsed v. Beall
Garsed v. Beall et al. This case involves only disputed questions of fact. It was heard here upon the pleadings, proofs, and the findings of the jury, in response to the issues sent down to be tried at law. Held, that issues of the kind are
Branch v. City of Charleston
Branch et al. v. City of Charleston et al. 1. In Tomlinson v. Branch, 15 Wall. 460, and City of Charleston v. Branch, id. 470, this court held that the respective roads and property of the two companies, which had become consolidated in the
Central Railroad & Banking Co. v. Georgia
Central Railroad and Banking Company v. Georgia. 1. The consolidation of two companies does not necessarily work a dissolution of both, and the creation of a new corporation. Whether such be its effect, depends upon the legislative intent m
Morrison v. Jackson
Morrison et al. v. Jackson. In 1802 a concession of six thousand arpents of land was made to S. by the acting Spanish governor of Upper Louisiana. An official survey, made by the officer designated in the concession, and in part fulfilment
United States v. Raymond
INTERMINGLED COTTON CASES. United States v. Raymond, Assignee; Same v. Kidd; Same v. Cowan, Administrator; Same v. Brabston ; Same v. Spear; Same v. McLean; Same v. Cook; Same v. Batchelor; Same v. Hawkins; Same v. Gardner, Assignee; Same v
Humboldt Township v. Long
Humboldt Township v. Long et al. 1. The bonds in question in this suit were issued under the authority of the same act of the legislature as those mentioned in the preceding case. The doctrines there held are reaffirmed. 2. A bond of the te
Marcy v. Township of Oswego
Marcy v. Township of Oswego. 1. An act of the legislature of Kansas of Feb. 25, 1870, provides, that whenever fifty of the qualified voters, being freeholders of any municipal township in any county, shall petition the board of county commi
County of Moultrie v. Rockingham Ten-Cent Savings-Bank
County of Moultrie v. Rockingham Ten-Cent Savings-Bank. 1. An act of the general assembly of the State of Illinois, approved March 26, 1869, authorized the board of supervisors of Moultrie County to subscribe to the stock of the Decatur, Su
Town of Concord v. Portsmouth Savings Bank
Town of Concord v. Portsmouth Savings Bank. An act of the general assembly of the State of Illinois in force March 7, 1867, authorized towns acting under the Township Organization Law of the State — of which the town of Concord was one — to
Lewis v. United States
Lewis, Trustee, v. United States. 1. The United States is entitled to priority of payment out of the effects of its bankrupt or insolvent debtor, whether he be principal or surety, or be solely, or only jointly with others, liable, and it i
Taylor v. Secor
STATE RAILROAD TAX CASES. Taylor, Collector, et al., v. Secor et al. Miller, Collector, et al., v. Jessup et al. Miller, Collector, et al., v. Kidder et al. 1. While this court does not lay down any absolute rule limiting the powers of a co
Harshman v. Bates County
Harshman v. Bates County. 1. Sect. 14 of art. 11 of the Constitution of Missouri, adopted in 1865, declaring that “ The general assembly shall not authorize any county, city, or town, to become a stockholder in, or to loan its credit to, an
United States v. Cruikshank
United States v. Cruikshank et al. 1. Citizens are tlie members of tlie political community to which they belong. They are the people who compose the community, and who, in their associated capacity, have established or submitted themselves
Board of Liquidation v. McComb
Board of Liquidation et al. v. McComb. 1. On the 24th of January, 1874, the legislature of Louisiana passed “the Eunding Act,” which created a board of liquidation, consisting of the governor and other State officers. Its principal stipulat
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.