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
County of Cass v. Johnston
County of Cass v. Johnston. 1. The provisions of the act of the General Assembly of Missouri, entitled “ An Act to facilitate the construction of railroads in the State of Missouri,” approved March 23, 1868, commonly known as the “ Township
Alvord v. United States
Alvord v. United States. 1. The presentation of a claim for compensation for carrying the mails, to the Second Assistant Postmaster-General, with whom all the business in relation to the claim had been previously transacted, is, in contempl
Cochrane v. Deener
Cochrane v. Deener. The court declines to vacate its decree rendered at the last term in Cochrane v. Deener, 94 IT. S. 780, but holds that third parties, whose interests are opposed to the Cochrane patents which were in controversy in that
Sessions v. Johnson
Sessions v. Johnson. On April 5, 1870, A., in order to secure B. as his indorser, made a mortgage of •certain property. This mortgage the latter, on the thirteenth of that month, assigned to C., to secure a debt due him. Oct, 4, A. made a s
Merchants' National Bank v. Cook
Merchants’ National Bank v. Cook. 1. The court, upon consideration of the facts in this case, holds 'that it appears that an insolvent.debtor transferred certain securities to his creditor with a view to give him-a fraudulent preference, an
Bergdoll v. Pollock
Bergdoll v. Pollock. 1. A manufacturer of fermented liquors, from whom taxes had heen collected under a second assessment, was, in order to recover them, required by the act of July 13,1866 (14 Stat. Ill, Rev. Stat., sect. 3226), to show th
United States v. Babbitt
United States v. Babbitt. 1. Where, under the acts of Eeb. 11, 1847 (9 Stat. 125), Sept. 28, 1850. (id. 520), March 22, 1852 (10 id. 3), and March 3, 1855 (1Ó id. 635), military bounty-land warrants were located on public land, subject to p
Insurance Co. v. Wolff
Insurance Company v. Wolff. 1. .A took out a policy of insurance upon the life of her husband. The premium was payable annually on the first day of November. The policy stipulated • for the payment of the amount of the insurance within sixt
Shields v. Ohio
Shields v. Ohio. 1. The consolidation, pursuant to the statute of Ohio of April 10, 1866 (4 Cur-wen, 2791), of two or more railway companies works their dissolution. All the powers and franchises of the nevv company which is thereby formed
Hart v. United States
Hart v. United States. 1. The ruling in Osborne v. United States, 19 Wall. 577, reaffirmed, and applied to this case. 2. The United States is not responsible for the laches or the wrongful acts of its officers; and, where it takes an offici
Ould v. Washington Hospital for Foundlings
Ould v. Washington Hospital for Foundlings. 1. A., by his last will and testament, admitted to probate June 22, 1864, devised certain lots of ground-in the District of Columbia to two trustees, “ and the ■ survivor of fliem, and the-heirs,
Transportation Line v. Hope
Transportation Line v. Hope. 1. Tlie testimony, of experts is admissible in determining an issue involving a question of nautical skill. 2. Although a transportation company, engaged in towing a barge from one point to another, does not occ
Pearson v. Yewdall
Pearson v. Yewdall. 1. Where a writ of error is defective in the statement of the parties thereto, the right to amend is not absolute, under sect. 1005, Rev. Stat.; but the court, in its discretion, may. allow the requisite amendment. to be
Beckwith v. Talbot
Beckwith v. Talbot. 1. It is not an absolute rule that collateral papers, made by a party, which are adduced in evidence against him to supply the want of his signature to a written agreement, required by the Statute of Frauds to be “ subsc
Cambuston v. United States
Cambuston v. United States. The District Court, in the exercise of its jurisdiction, under an act entitled “An Act to ascertain and settle the private land claims in the State of California,” approved March 3, 1857 (9 Stat. 631), rendered a
Railway Co. v. Stewart
Railway Company v. Stewart. 1.‘The court, in construing .the contract between the parties -to this suit, holds that the company is not bound to deliver the stipulated new bonds until all the construction bonds which are still outstanding sh
Keystone Bridge Co. v. Phœnix Iron Co.
Keystone Bridge Company v. Phœnix Iron Company. 1. The manufacture of round or cylindrical bars flattened and drilled at the eye, for use in the lower chords of iron truss bridges, is not an infringeihent of . letters-patent for an improvem
Insurance Co. v. Dutcher
Insurance Company v. Dutcher. The court holds that the assured, having elected to discontinue the payment of premiums, is entitled to a paid-up policy pro tanto, without paying her note to the company for part premiums, but that the note wi
Nimick v. Coleman
Nimick v. Coleman. An appeal does not lie to this court from the decree of a circuit court dismissingj in the exercise of its supervisory jurisdiction under the bankrupt law, an appeal^ from a district court, and affirming the order appeale
Colorado Co. v. Commissioners
Colorado Company v. Commissioners. Where an act of Congress confirms a Mexican grant of five hundred thousand acres.to the extent of eleven square leagues, to be selected within the limits of .the claim, according to the lines of the public
Milner v. Meek
Milner v. Meek. 1. An appeal, where the amount in controversy is sufficient, lies to this court from a decree rendered by the Circuit Court, in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction, in a suit wherein a bill in equity against the credi
Insurance Co. v. Haven
Insurance Company v. Haven. The owner'in fee of land and of the buildings thereon, to whom has been issued a policy of fire insurance, which provides that “ if tlie interest of the assured in the property be any other than the entire, uncon
Insurance Co. v. Rodel
Insurance Company v. Rodel. 1. By a policy'upon, the life of A., for the benefit of his wife, an insurance company promised to pay her a certain sum, " for her sole and separate use and benefit, ninety days after due notice and satisfactory
Insurance Co. v. Express Co.
Insurance Company v. Express Company. A policy, issued to an express company, insuring goods and merchandise in its care for transportation while on board cars or other conveyances, contained the following provision : “ It is a further cond
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.