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
1881 Cases
233 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
Micas v. Williams
Micas v. Williams. Where the record is such as to furnish a sufficient color of right to the dismissal - of the writ of error to justify the court in entertaining with a motion to dismiss a motion' io affirm under Rule 6,— Held, that althou
Jones v. Buckell
Jones v. Buckell. This court will not pass upon the charge below, where the bill of exceptionsV does not set forth the evidence, and there is nothing to show that the question of law to which the charge relates is involved in the issue. Eeb
Griggs v. Houston
Griggs v. Houston. 1. Sections 1166 and 1167 of the Code of Tennessee, touching the liability which ' railroad ■Companies incur • by > failing/' to observe - certain precautions in' running their trains; do not- apply ..to contractors engag
Stow v. Chicago
Stow v. Chicago. Reissued letters-patent No. 3274, bearing date Jan. 19, 1869, granted to Henry M Stow, for “ improved pavement,” and the letters-patent No. 134,404, bearing date Dee. 81, 1872, issued to him for “ improvement in wood paveme
Micou v. National Bank
Micou v. National Bank. This case involves only disputed questions of fact, and the court, upon a consideration of the proofs, holds that certain decrees against a guardian in favor of his wards, wliereunder his real estate was purchased by
Gottfried v. Miller
Gottfried v. Miller. 1. The right of a corporation to assign letters-patent, whereof it is the owner, is not affected by an attachment whereunder shares of its capital stock, belonging to a stockholder, were seized, and the assignment may b
Ex parte Hagar
Ex parte Hagar. The District Court sitting in admiralty will not be restrained from proceeding in a suit to-recover pilotage. Petition for a -writ of prohibition. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. The case was argued by Mr.
Ex parte Ferry Co.
Ex parte Ferry Company. Ex parte Gordon (supra, p. 515) reaffirmed, the doctrines there announced being applicable, although the amount involved in the suit below is not sufficient to give this court appellate jurisdiction. Petition for a w
Ex parte Gordon
Ex parte Gordon. •1. A writ of prohibition will not be. issued to a District Court of the Uniti States sitting in admiralty, wherein a libel claiming damages was file] against a steamer for drowning certain seamen of a vessel with which, sh
Strong v. Willey
Strong v. Willey. Same v. Same. A case in equity, wherein an account and an injunction were prayed for, was at issue upon bill, answer, and replication. Held, that the parties, by referring the matter in controversy to an -arbitrator, with
Stewart v. Lansing
Stewart v. Lansing. 1. The indorsee of negotiable paper which has a fraudulent or illegal inception must, in order to recover thereon, prove that he is a bona fide holder thereof for value. 2. Coupon bonds of a town in New York were by comm
Draper v. Springport
Draper v. Springport. Where a town in New York subscribed for stock in a railroad company, and the commissioners, authorized to execute bonds in payment therefor, issued unsealed obligations, whereon a bona fide holder for value brought sui
Vietor v. Arthur
Vietor v. Arthur. Stockings of worsted, or of worsted and cotton, made on frames and imported after June 22, 1874, are dutiable as stockings, under schedule M, class 3, sect. 2504, .of the Revised Statutes. Error to the Circuit Court oí the
Bank v. Tennessee
Bank v. Tennessee. A bank, by its charter, is required to “pay to the State 'n annual tax of one-half of one per. cent on each share of capital stock, whicl shall be in lieu of all other taxes,” and is authorized to “ purchase and hold ., l
Vinton v. Hamilton
Vinton v. Hamilton. Letters-patent No. 143,600, dated Oct.-14, 1873, and.granted.to John' J. Vinton for an improvement in the manufacture of iron from blast-furnace slag, are void, inasmuch as. the process and applia - : s described in his
Huntington v. Palmer
Huntington v. Palmer. Hawes v. Oakland (supra, p. 450) reaffirmed. Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of California. Huntington filed this bill against Palmer, tax-collector of the County of Alameda, Califor
United States v. Steamship Co.
United States v. Steamship Company. 1. The court holds that all questions relating to the character of the vessels employed by the Pacific Mail Steamship Company in executing its contracts with the United States and to the performance of th
Louisville v. Savings Bank
Louisville v. Savings Bank. L When necessary to determine-conflicting rights, courts of justice will take - cognizance of the fractions of a day. 2. The section of the Constitution of Illinois, entitled “'Municipal subscriptions to railroad
People v. Commissioners
People v. Commissioners. 1. Qumre, Are the statutes of a State in violation of the Constitution of the United States if they subject to taxation the capital of her citizens, although, on the day to which the assessment of it relates, it is
Lamar v. Micou
Lamar v. Micou. A defendant, who made no defence except to reduce the amount of the recovery, cannot appeal from a decree against him for less than $5,000. Motion to dismiss an appeal from the Circuit Court of th® United States for the Sout
Murphy v. United States
Murphy v. United States. A,claim against the United States for damages which a contractor alleged he had sustained was, by the appropriate department, adjusted upon a basis to which he agreed. He accepted the sum allowed, and gave a receipt
Rosenblatt v. Johnston
Rosenblatt v. Johnston. The personal property of an insolvent national hank in the hands of a receiver appointed pursuant to sect. 5234 of the Revised Statutes is exempt from taxation under State laws. - Appeal from the Circuit Court of the
Hawes v. Oakland
Hawes v. Oakland. L A shareholder in the Contra Costa Water-works Company brought his bill in equity against the city of Oakland, the company, and its directors, alleging that the company was furnishing the city with water, free of charge,
Wells v. Nickles
Wells v. Nickles. 1. While no act of Congress expressly authorizes the Secretary of the Interior or other officer of the Land Department to appoint timber agents, the appropriation of money by Congress to pay them is a recognition of the va
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.