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
1882 Cases
192 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
Hill v. Harding
Hill v. Harding. A State court, in which an action against a bankrupt upon a debt provable in bankruptcy is pending, must, on his application under sect. 5106 of the Revised Statutes, stay all proceedings to await the determination of the c
Schell v. Dodge
Schell v. Dodge. Barney v. Isler. Barney v. Cox. Barney v. Friedman. Where a cause has been finally disposed of here, by the dismissal of the writ of error, this court has no power, at a subsequent term, to alter its ‘judgment to one of aff
Schell v. Cochran
Schell v. Cochran. Cochran v. Schell. 1. Where a collector of customs brings a writ of error to review a judgment recovered against him for moneys exacted by and paid to him on entries, this court will, if it affirms the judgment, allow int
Barber v. Schell
Barber v. Schell. Schell v. Barber. 1. By schedule D of the act of July 30,1846, c. 74, a duty of twenty-five per cent ad valorem was imposed on “ cotton laces, cotton insertings,” and “ manufactures composed wholly of cotton, not otherwise
Basket v. Hassell
Basket v. Hassell. 1. A certificate of deposit in these terms: — “Evansville National Bank, “ Evansville, Ind., Sept. 8, 1875. H. M. Chaney has deposited in tills hank twenty-three thousand five hundred and fourteen /ft dollars, payable in
Davis v. South Carolina
Davis v. South Carolina. 1. Section 643 of the Revised Statutes, which provides for removing to the Circuit Court suits or criminal prosecutions commenced in a State court. against “ any officer appointed under or acting hy authority of any
Union Trust Co. v. Walker
Union Trust Company v. Walker. An assignment of such. claims as are mentioned in Union Trust Company v. Souther, ante, p. 591, passes the right of the original holder to payment out of the fund in the hands of the receiver. ■ Appeal from th
Union Trust Co. v. Souther
Union Trust Company v. Souther. Where the complainant prays for the appointment of a receiver of mortgaged railroad property, pending proceedings for foreclosure, the court, in the exercise of a sound discretion, may, as a condition of gran
Ambler v. Choteau
Ambler v. Choteau. Where the object of a suit in chancery is the recovery of the damages which the complainant alleges that he has sustained by reason of an unlawful and fraudulent conspiracy to cheat him out of his interest in an original
Memphis & Charleston Railroad v. Alabama
Memphis and Charleston Railroad Company v. Alabama. The Memphis and Charleston Railroad Company is made by the statutes of Alabama an Alabama corporation; and, although- previously incorporated in Tennessee also, cannot remove into the Circ
Read v. Plattsmouth
Read v. Plattsmouth. 1. Negotiable coupon-bonds were, without authority of law, issued in October, 1872, by a city in Nebraska, for the purpose of raising money wherewith to construct a high-school building within her limits. . They were so
Mills County v. Railroad Companies
Mills County v. Railroad Companies. 1. The swamp and overflowed lands granted hy the act of Sept. 28.1850, c. 84, are subject to the disposal of the States wherein they respectively lie, and no party other than the United States can questio
Quincy v. Cooke
Quincy v. Cooke. The General Assembly of Illinois enacted, March 27, 1869, a statute as follows: “ The acts of the city council of the city of Quincy, from June 2, 1868, to August 28, 1868, in ordering an election on the proposition to subs
Myers v. Swann
Myers v. Swann. The Circuit Court cannot take jurisdiction of a suit removed from a State court under- the third subdivision of sect. 639 of the Revised Statutes, on account of “prejudice or local influeneé",” unless all the necessary parti
Pana v. Bowler
Pana v. Bowler. 1. The act of the General Assembly of Illinois approved Feb. 24, 1869, amendatory of an act entitled “An Act to incorporate the Illinois Southeastern Railway Company,” approved Feb. 25, 1867, removed the limitation of •130,0
McLaughlin v. United States
McLaughlin v. United States. 1. Where a'bill was filed in the Circuit Court by the District Attorney in the name of the United States, to vacate a patent for lands, but no objection touching his authority to bring the suit was made, and a d
District of Columbia v. Armes
District of Columbia v. Armes. 1. In a suit "against a municipal corporation to recover damages for injuries received from a fall caused by a defective sidewalk, which was in an unguarded condition, it is competent for the plaintiff to show
The "Adriatic"
The “Adriatic.” 1. Under the act of Eeb. 16, 1875, c. 77, a finding in a case of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction on the instance side of the Circuit Court has the effect of a special verdict in an action at law, and although no exceptio
Sun Mutual Insurance v. Ocean Insurance
Sun Mutual Insurance Company v. Ocean Insurance Company. 1. Where, in a suit in admiralty by one insurance company against another upon a contract of reinsurance, it became essential for the libellant to show that the risk which it had assu
Williams v. Jackson
Williams v. Jackson. Jackson v. Stickney. 1. By a trust deed, duly .recorded, land was conveyed to tlie trustees in fee, and they were authorized to release it to the grantor upon payment of the negotiable promissory note thereby secured. B
Close v. Glenwood Cemetery
Close v. Glenwood Cemetery. Borcherling v. Glenwood Cemetery. 1. A cemetery company was incorporated in 1854 by an act of Congress which authorized it to purchase and hold ninety acres of land in the District of Columbia, and to receive gif
Baldwin v. Stark
Baldwin v. Stark. 1. This court has jurisdiction to-re-examine the judgment of the Supreme Court of a State, rendered adversely to the right and title .which a party to the suit specially sets up to land under a patent issued by the United
Wabash Railway Co. v. McDaniels
Wabash Railway Company v. McDaniels. 1. This court will not re-examine the order of the Circuit Court, refusing to set aside the verdict upon the ground that the jury awarded excessive damages. 2. The same degree of care which a railroad co
Cook County National Bank v. United States
Cook County National Bank v. United States. Section 3466 of the Revised Statutes, infra, p. 447, which, in certain cases therein mentioned, gives, tó the United States priority of payment of debts due to it, does not apply to its demands ag
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.