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
1877 Cases
258 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
Goodenough Hoese-Shoe Manufacturing Co. v. Rhode Island Horse-Shoe Co.
GOODENOUGH HOESE-SHOE MANUFACTURING CO. v. RHODE ISLAND HORSE-SHOE CO. ERROR to the supreme court op the STATE OF NEW YORK. No. 665. Submitted October 15, 1877. Decided November 5, 1877. Until the record of a judgment in a state court which
Marsh v. Seymour
Marsh v. Seymour. Same v. Same. 1. The court concurs with the court below that reissued letters-patent No. 72, dated May 7,1861, and No. 1683, dated May 31,1861, for new and useful improvements in reaping-machines, and reissued letters No.
Martin v. Marks
Martin v. Marks. 1. The act of March S, 1857 (11 Stat. 251), confirmed to the several States their selections of swamp lands, which had then been reported to the Commissioner of the General Land-Office, so far as the lands were then “ vacan
Emigrant Co. v. County of Wright
Emigrant Company v. County of Wright. The legislature of Iowa having, by an act passed Feb. 2,1853, granted to the counties in which the same were respectively situated the swamp and overflowed lands to which the State was entitled under th
Insurance Co. v. Harris
Insurance Company v. Harris. Assumpsit against an insurance company upon a life policy. Plea, non assumpsit, «•¡ill an agreement that either party might introduce any matter in evidence which would be legally admissible if it had been speci
The "City of Hartford"
The “City of Hartford” and the “Unit.” 1. A steamboat collided with and sunk a schooner towed by a tug. The owner of the schooner and the owner of her cargo severally libelled the steamboat and tug, both of which were found to be in fault.
Herbert v. Butler
Herbert v. Butler. 1. A paper incorporated in the record, and certified to be a part thereof by the court below, if it has all the requisites of a bill of exceptions, will be considered here as such, although it be otherwise entitled. 2. Wh
Hurley v. Jones
Hurley v. Jones. 1. When a cause, reached in its regular order upon the docket, has, under Rule 10, been dismissed by reason of the appellant's non-appearance, for which no just cause existed, it will not, over the objection of the appellee
The "Virginia Ehrman"
The “Virginia Ehrman” and the “Agnese.” A ship in tow of a steam-tug, each having its own master and crew, collided with and sunk a steam-dredge lying at anchor at a proper place, displaying good signal-lights, and having competent lookouts
Trust Co. v. Sedgwick
Trust Company v. Sedgwick. The court adheres to its ruling in Phipps v. Sedgwick {95 U. S. 3), that, where a husband causes real estate to be conveyed to his wife in fraud of his creditors, a judgment in personam for its value cannot be tak
Memphis v. Brown
Memphis v. Brown. A., having a decree against the city of Memphis for the payment of money, obtained, in March, 1875, a mandamus, commanding her to levy upon all the taxable property of the city a tax sufficient in amount to pay the decree.
Memphis v. United States
Memphis v. United States. 1. Tested rights acquired hy a creditor under and by virtue of a statute of a State granting new remedies, or enlarging those which existed when the debt was contracted, are beyond the reach of the legislature, and
United States v. Memphis
United States v. Memphis. 1. In March and July, 1867, A. entered into, contracts with the City of Memphis to pave certain streets. Most of the work was done after the passage of an act of the legislature of Tennessee of Dec. 3, 1867, by whi
Chaboya v. Umbarger
Chaboya v. Umbarger. A claim under a Mexican grant was, in 1862, confirmed by this court to A. to the extent of five hundred acres of land. The title thereto was afterwards transferred to B., who brought ejectment therefor against A. The la
County of Macon v. Shores
County of Macon v. Shores. 1. Where, in an action against a county, to recover the amount due on coupons detached from bonds issued by it in payment of its subscription to the capital stock of a railroad company, the declaration avers that
Lilienthal's Tobacco v. United States
Lilienthal’s Tobacco v. United States. 1. The ninth section of the act of July 13, 1866 (14 Stat. 133), imposed upon “ smoking-tobacco sweetened, stemmed, or butted, a tax of forty cents per pound,” and “on smoking-tobacco of all kinds not
United States v. McKee
United States v. McKee. McKee v. United States. In 1864, A. entered into two contracts with the United States to deliver a specified number of tons “of timothy or prairie hay” at Fort Gibson, and other points within the Indian Territory, wh
Hyndman v. Roots
Hyndman v. Roots. This case involves merely questions of fact; and the court finds that letters-patent No. 106,165, granted Aug. 9, 1870, to William G. Hyndman, for an “improvement in rotary blowers,” infringe the first, second, third, and
United States v. Watkins
United States v. Watkins. Bringier v. United States. 1. Where a grant of lands; made pursuant to a sale of them, and describing them by metes and bounds, according to a previous regular survey, was made by the Spanish Intendant, March 5, 18
McMicken v. United States
McMicken v. United States. X. On Dec. 17,1798, A. applied to the Spanish governor-general for a grant of six hundred and ten arpents of land, for a plantation and settlement, in the district of Bqton Rouge, three miles from the Mississippi.
Ashcroft v. Railroad Co.
Ashcroft v. Railroad Company. 1. Reissued letters-patent No. 3727, granted by the United States, Nov. 9,1869, to Edward H. Ashcroft, assignee of William Naylor, for an improvement in steam safety-valves, being a reissue of original letters
Lamborn v. County Commissioners
Lamborn v. County Commissioners. A contract for the purchase by A. from B. of certain lands in Kansas ¡provided that A. should pay all taxes lawfully assessed on them, and that B. would convey them upon the payment of the purchase-money. Th
Godfrey v. Terry
Godfrey v. Terry. The Merchants’ Bank of South Carolina, at Cheraw, suspended specie payments Nov. 13, 1860, and never thereafter resumed. Its charter contains a provision that, “ in case of the failure of the said bank, each stockholder, c
United States v. Norton
United States v. Norton. 1. The proclamation of the President of June 13, 1865 (13 Stat. 763), annulling, in the territory of the United States east of the Mississippi, all restrictions previously imposed upon internal, domestic, and coastw
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.