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
1884 Cases
280 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
Badger v. Gutierez's Administratrix
BADGER, Collector, v. GUTIEREZ’S Administratrix. IN error to the circuit court of the united states for the EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA. Submitted April 7th, 1884. Decided May 5th, 1884. Collector of Customs— Vessels. The papers of a vess
Hitz v. National Metropolitan Bank
HITZ v. NATIONAL METROPOLITAN BANK. APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. Argned March 14th and 17th, 1884. Decided May 5th, 1884. Deed — Fraud—Husband and Wife — Judgment Lien — Tenancy by Curtesy. In the absence of a
Louisiana ex rel. Nelson v. Police Jury of St. Martin's Parish
LOUISIANA Ex rel. NELSON v. POLICE JURY OF ST. MARTIN’S PARISH. IN ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OP THE STATE OP LOUISIANA. Argued April 25th, 1884. Decided May 5th, 1884. When a contract is made with a municipal corporation upon the faith tha
Hagar v. Reclamation District No. 108
HAGAR v. RECLAMATION DISTRICT NO. 108. SAME v. SAME. APPEALS EEOM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. Argued March 21st, 1884. Decided May 5th, 1884. Constitutional Law — Legal Tender — Swamp Lands — Tax.
Williams v. Morgan
WILLIAMS & Another v. MORGAN & Another, Trustees. A r REAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF TIIE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA. Argued October 30th, 31st, 1883. Decided May 5th, 1884. Appeal — Jurisdiction—Parties. A decree in a suit
Hennequin v. Clews
HENNEQUIN & Another v. CLEWS & Another. IN ERROR TO THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK. Argued March 13th, 1884. Decided May 5th, 1884. JBarilcruptcy. One hypothecating, to secure a debt due from himself, securities which had been p
Johnson v. Waters
JOHNSON, Dative Testamentary Executor v. WATERS, Administrator. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA. Argued October 16th, 17th, 1883. Decided May 5th, 1884. Donation (inter vivos), (mortis causa)
Robb v. Connolly
ROBB v. CONNOLLY. IN ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA. Submitted April 7th, 1884. Decided May 5th, 1884. Constitutional Law — Fugitives from Justice — Conflict of Law. An agent, appointed by the State-in which a fugitive from justic
Connecticut Mutual Life Insurance v. Lathrop
CONNECTICUT MUTUAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY v. LATHROP, Administrator. IN ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF TIIE UNITED STATES FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI. Argued April 3d, 1884. Decided May 5th, 1884. Court and Ju/ry Trial — Evidence. T
Carver v. United States
CARVER v. UNITED STATES. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF CLAIMS. Argued April 18th, 1884. Decided May 5th, 1884. Claims against the United States-. If a treasury agent for the collection of cotton, who was convicted by a military commission of def
Phillips v. Detroit
PHILLIPS and Others v. DETROIT. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN. Argued April 22d, 1884. Decided May 5th, 1884 Patent. The construction of the pavement described in the letters patent
Gibbs & Sterrett Manufacturing Co. v. Brucker
GIBBS & STERRETT MANUFACTURING COMPANY v. BRUCKER. IN ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN. Submitted April 25th, 1884. Decided May 5th, 1884. Contract — Lord’s Dmj. An agreement signed by th
Mobile & Montgomery Railway Co. v. Jurey
MOBILE & MONTGOMERY RAILWAY COMPANY v. JUREY & Another. IN ERROR TO TIIE CIRCUIT COURT OF TIIE UNITED STATES FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA. Vrguod April 15th, 1884. Decided May 5th, 1884. Common Carrier — Contract—Court and Jury — Dama
Colt v. Colt
COLT & Another v. COLT, Executrix. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOE THE DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT. Argted April 18th, 21st, and 22d, 1884. Decided May 5th, 1884. Estoppel — Executor and Administrator — Practice—Trust—Wil
Carroll County v. Smith
CARROLL COUNTY v. SMITH. IN EEROS TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES. FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI. Argued April 27th, 1884. Decided May 5th, 1884. Municipal Bonds — Construction of Statutes — Estoppel—Conflict of Law— St
Thorwegan v. King
THORWEGAN v. KING. IN ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED ■ STATES FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI. Submitted April 15th, 1884 Decided May 5th, 1884. Court and Jury — Deceit. "Where the complaint in an action on the ease for decei
Spindle v. Shreve
SPINDLE, Assignee, v. SHREVE & Another. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OE THE UNITED STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS. Argued April 1st, 1884. Decided May 5th, 1884. Bankruptcy — Deect—Nquity—Trust. A conveyance of specifically d
Thompson v. First National Bank
THOMPSON & Another, Administrator, v. FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF TOLEDO. IN ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO. Submitted April 22d, 1884. Decided May 5th, 1884. Partnership— Trial — Exceptions. A
Barrett v. Failing
BARRETT v. FAILING & Wife. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON. Argued April 16th, 17th, 1884. Decided May 5th, 1884. Conflict of Law — Dower—Divorce. A divorce from the bond of matrimony bars the w
Pacific Railroad v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.
PACIFIC RAILROAD OF MISSOURI v. MISSOURI PACIFIC RAILWAY COMPANY & Others. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI. Argued April 23d, 24th, 1884. Decided May 5th, 1884. Equity — Fraud—Laches—P
United States v. Bryant
UNITED STATES v. BRYANT & Another. IN ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OE THE UNITED STATES EOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OE ALABAMA. Submitted April 15th, 1884. Decided May 5th, 1884. Action — Practice—United States. Under §§ 2943 and 2943 of the Co
Eagleton Manufacturing Co. v. West, Bradley & Carey Manufacturing Co.
EAGLETON MANUFACTURING COMPANY v. WEST, BRADLEY & CAREY MANUFACTURING COMPANY & Another. APPEAL PROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK. Argued April 15th. and 16th, 1884. Decided May 5th, 1884. Pat
Texas & Pacific Railway Co. v. Murphy
TEXAS & PACIFIC RAILWAY COMPANY v. MURPHY. IN ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS. Submitted April 3d, 1884. Decided April 21st, 1884. Error — Jurisdiction—Limitations, Statute of — Supersedeas. If a petition for a rehearing is presented in
Texas & Pacific Railway Co. v. Kirk
TEXAS & PACIFIC RAILWAY COMPANY v. KIRK. IN ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS. Submitted April 3d, 1884. Decided April 21st, 1884. Amendment — Error—Practice. Under authority conferred upon the court by § 1005 Rey. Stat., a writ of error
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.