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
1876 Cases
224 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
Wiswall v. Campbell
Wiswall et al. v. Campbell et al., Assignees. This court has no jurisdiction to review a judgment of the Circuit Court, rendered in a proceeding upon an appeal from an order of the District Court, rejecting the claim of a supposed creditor
Cockle v. Flack
Cockle et al. v. Flack et al. 1. Where a commission-merchant, in Baltimore, advanced to a pork-packer, in Peoria, $100,000, for whieh he was to receive interest at the rate of ten per e'ent per annum, and a fixed commission for the sale of
Smith v. Gaines
Smith et al. v. Gaines. 1. Under the laws of Louisiana, sureties in an appeal-hond, which operates as a supersedeas, are liable, by a summary proceeding, to judgment, after execution on the original judgment has been issued, and a return of
The "Juniata."
The “Juniata.” 1. The doctrine announced in The Atlas, supra, p. 302, that where an innocent party suffers damages by a collision resulting from the mutual fault of two vessels, only one of which is libelled, the decree should be against su
Brant v. Virginia Coal & Iron Co.
Brant v. Virginia Coal and Iron Company et al. 1. Where a testator made a bequest to his wife of all his estate, real and personal, “ to have and to hold during her life, and to do with as she sees proper before her death,” the wife took a
Talty v. Freedman's Savings & Trust Co.
Talty v. Freedman’s Savings and Trust Company. Where the pledgee parts with the pledge to a bona fide purchaser without notice of any right.or claim of the pledgor, the latter cannot recover against such purchaser without first tendering hi
Kimball v. Evans
Kimball v. Evans. Where a petition for the removal of a suit filed under the act of March 2,1867 (14 Stat. 558), was, in accordance witli the practice of the State, reserved for the decision of the Supreme Court, and the latter dismissed th
Martin v. Hazard Powder Co.
Martin v. Hazard Powder Company. The doctrine announced in Jerome v. McCarter, 21 Wall. 17, affirmed, and applied to this case. On motion for a rule upon the plaintiff in error to file a new supersedeas bond. Mr. 8. F. Phillips for the defe
Indianapolis & St. Louis Railroad v. Horst
Indianapolis and St. Louis Railroad Company v. Horst. 1. When instructions are asked in the aggregate, and there is any thing exceptionable in either of them, the court may properly reject the whole. 2. It is the settled law in this court,
Sawin v. Kenny
Sawin, Administrator, v. Kenny. Under the Code of Practice of Arkansas, in force wheirthii judgment was rendered,- and therefore furnishing a rule of practice for the courts of the United States in that State, an action on a contract, upon
Bigelow v. Berkshire Life Insurance
Bigelow v. Berkshire Life Insurance Company. In an action against it upon a policy of life insurance, which provided that it should be null and void if the insured died by suicide, “ sane or insane,” the company pleaded that he'“died from t
Windsor v. McVeigh
Windsor v. McVeigh. 1. A sentence of ar court, pronounced against a party without hearing him, or giving him an opportunity to be heard, is not a judicial determination of his rights, and is not entitled to respect in any other tribunal. 2.
Dalton v. Jennings
Dalton v. Jennings. Letters-patent No. 124,340, issued to John Dalton, March 5,1872, for “ an alleged new and useful improvement in ladies’ hair-nets;” are void, because his specification and claim precisely and accurately describe various
Broughton v. Pensacola
Broughton v. Pensacola. A change in the charter of a municipal corporation, in whole or part, by an amendment of its provisions, or the substitution of a new charter in place of the old one, embracing substantially the same corporators and
Barkley v. Levee Commissioners
Barkley v. Levee Commissioners et al. 1. A public corporation, charged with specific duties, such as building and repairing levees within a certain district, being superseded in its functions by a law dividing the district, and creating a n
Whiteside v. United States
Whiteside et al. v. United States. 1. An assistant special agent of the Treasury Department has no authority to bind the United States by contract, to Tepay the expenses of transporting, repairing, &c., abandoned or captured cotton. 2. The
Garfielde v. United States
Garfielde v. United States. The Post-Office Department, by public notice, invited proposals for conveying the mails on route No. “43,132, from Portland, Oregon, by Port Townsend (W. T.) and San Juan, to Sitka, Alaska, fourteen hundred miles
Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance
Schacker v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company. The doctrine in Lee v. Watson, 1 Wall. 337, that, “ in an action upon a money-demand, where the general issue is pleaded, the matter in dispute is the debt claimed, and its amount, as stated in t
Shaw v. United States
Shaw v. United States. Where a steamer, lying at the time at the wharf at St. Louis, was taken into the service of the United States by a quartermaster of the United States, for a. trip to different points on the Mississippi River, the comp
del Valle v. Harrison
Yznaga del Valle v. Harrison et al. As the Code of Practice of Louisiana provides that all definitive or final judgments must be signed by the judge rendering them, this court, under sect. 691 of the Revised Statutes, as_amended by the act
Hornor v. Henning
Hornor v. Henning et al. The act of Congress (16 Stat. 98), under which certain corporations are organized in the District of Columbia, contains a provision, that, “ if the indebtedness of any company organized under this act shall at any t
Grant v. Hartford & New Haven Railroad
Grant, Collector, v. Hartford and New Haven Railroad Company. The expression “profits used in construction” (within the meaning of the one hundred and twenty-second section of the Internal Revenue Act of June 30, 1864, 13 Stat. 284) does no
Morgan v. Louisiana
Morgan v. Louisiana. 1. Upon a sale of the property and franchises of a railroad corporation under a decree founded upon a mortgage which in terms covers the franchises, or under a process upon a money judgment against the company, immunity
Sherman v. Buick
Sherman v. Buick. 1. Testimony, whether parol or documentary, which shows a want of power in officers who issue a patent, is admissible in an action at law to defeat a title set up under it. In such case, the patent is not merely voidable,
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.