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
1888 Cases
293 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
Dow v. Memphis & Little Rock Railroad
DOW v. MEMPHIS AND LITTLE ROCK RAILROAD COMPANY. APPEAL PROM THE CIRCÜIT COURT OP THE UNITED STATES POR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OP ARKANSAS. Argued January 9, 1888. — Decided February 20, 1888. úalveston Railroad y. Gowdrey, 11 Wall. 459, affi
Crawford v. Halsey
CRAWFORD v. HALSEY. EEEOE TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OE .THE UNITED STATES FOE THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA. Submitted February 2, 1888. — Decided February 20, 1888. A member of a bankrupt partnership, purchasing of the assignee in bankruptc
United States v. Morant
UNITED STATES v. MORANT. APPEAL PROM THE DISTRICT COURT OP THE UNITED STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OP FLORIDA. Submitted January 30, 1888. — Decided February 20, 1888. The court, on motion, amends the judgment and decree in this case he
Hoadley's Administrators v. San Francisco
HOADLEY’S ADMINISTRATORS v. SAN FRANCISCO. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OE' THE STATE OE CALIFORNIA. Submitted December 8, 1887. — Decided February 20, 1888. When a cause is brought here by writ of error to a state court, on the ground that t
United States v. Jung Ah Lung
UNITED STATES v. JUNG AH LUNG. APPE'AL ÉBOM THE CIROÜIT COURT OE THE UNITED STATES FOR THE ' DISTRICT OE CALIFORNIA. Submitted January 9, 1888. — Decided February 13, 1888. A ©hiñese laborer, who resided in the United States on November 17t
Thornton v. Schreiber
THORNTON v. SCHREIBER. ERROR TO THE CXRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OE PENNSYLVANIA. Argued January 19, 20, 1888. — Decided February 13, 1888. An employé of a business house, who, having a principal place in the
Phillips v. Mound City Land & Water Ass'n
PHILLIPS v. MOUND CITY LAND AND WATER ASSOCIATION. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OE THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. Submitted January 6, 1888. — Decided February 13, 1888. An adjudication by the highest court of a State that certain proceedings befor
Munson v. Mayor of New York
MUNSON v. MAYOR, ALDERMEN AND COMMONALTY OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK. MAYOR, ALDERMEN AND COMMONALTY OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK v. MUNSONN. APPEALS FBOM THE CIBCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED 'STATES FOB THE SOUTHEBN DISTBICT OF FEW YOBK. Argued' Februar
The Strathairly
THE STRATHAIRLY APPEAL PROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OE THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. Argued February 1, 1888. — Decided February 13, 1888. The fine imposed upon the master of a vessel, by Rev. Stat. § 4253, for a violation of
Great Falls Manufacturing Co. v. Attorney General
GREAT FALLS MANUFACTURING COMPANY v. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OP THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND. Submitted December 19, 1887.— Decided February 6, 1888. An arbitration was had iir 1863 between the
Knight v. Paxton
KNIGHT v. PAXTON. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS. Submitted January 4, 1888. — Decided February 6, 1888. An ante-nuptial settlement was excuted prior to 1867, by which J. M. conveyed
Ætna Life Insurance v. Middleport
ÆTNA LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY v. MIDDLEPORT. APPEAL PROM THE CIRCtJIT COURT OP THE" UNITED STATES POR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OP ILLINOIS. Submitted January 4, 1888. — Decided February 6, 1888. The town of Middleport having, in pursuance of a s
United States v. Smith
UNITED STATES v. SMITH. CERTIFICATE OF DIVISION OF OPINION FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK. Argued January 16, 1888. — Decided February 6, 1888. Section 3639 of the Eevised Statutes does not
French v. Hopkins
FRENCH v. HOPKINS. ERROR TO-’THiEi-SUPREME COURT OP THE STATE OP CALIFORNIA. Submitted January 30, 1888. — Decided February 6, 1888. The case is dismissed for want of jurisdiction as the record fails to show, expressly or by implication, th
Fayolle v. Texas & Pacific Railroad
FAYOLLE v. TEXAS AND PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY. APPEAL PROM THE SUPREME COURT OP THE DISTRICT OP COLUMBIA. Submitted January 30, 1888. — Decided February 6, 1888. This appeal having become inoperative through failure to docket the case here
Trask v. Jacksonville, Pensacola & Mobile Railroad
TRASK v. JACKSONVILLE, PENSACOLA AND MOBILE RAILROAD COMPANY. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA. Argued January 5, 6, 1888. — Decided February 6, 1888. On .the proof in this case the cou
Hopkins v. Orr
HOPKINS v. ORR. ERROR TO THE SUPREME OOURT OF THE TERRITORY OF HEW MEXICO. Argued January 20, 23, 1888. — Decided February 6, 1888. A promissory note, upon wliicli the defendant is shown to have admitted liis indebtedness to the plaintiff,
District of Columbia v. Gallaher
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA v. GALLAHER. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF CLAIMS. Argued January 23, 1888. — Decided February 6, 1888. When, in the performance of a written contract, both parties put a practical construction upon it which is at variance w
Brazee v. Schofield
BRAZEE v. SCHOFIELD. APPEAL PROM THE SUPKEME COURT OF THE TERRITORY OF WASHINGTON. Argued and Submitted December 16, 1887 —Decided January 30, 1888. In March, 1848, A S and E S, his .wife, settled upon a tract of public land in what was the
Stewart v. Masterson
STEWART v. MASTERSON. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOE THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS. Submitted January 9, 1888. — Decided January 30, 1888. The signing of a citation after the expiration ,of the term to which an appea
Brown v. McConnell
BROWN v. McCONNELL. APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE TERRITORY OF WASHINGTON. Submitted January 9, 1883. — Decided January 30, 1888. The signing of a citation returnable to the proper term of this court, hut without the acceptance of se
United States v. Hess
UNITED STATES v. HESS. CERTIFICATE OF DIVISION IN OPINION BETWEEN THE JUDGES OF THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK. Argued January 16, 1888. — Decided January 30, 1888. In an indictment for committi
Smith v. Alabama
SMITH v. ALABAMA. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OP THE STATE OF ALABAMA. Argued January 4, 1888. — Decided January 30, 1888, The legislature of Alabama enacted a law entitled “ an act to require locomotive engineers in this State to be examine
King Iron Bridge & Manufacturing Co. v. Otoe County
KING IRON BRIDGE AND MANUFACTURING COMPANY v. OTOE COUNTY. ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT OOURT OE THE UNITED STATES EOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA. Submitted December 22, 1887. — Decided January 30, 1888. In Nebraska tie cause of action upon a county
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.