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
Providence & Stonington Steamship Co. v. Clare's Administratrix
PROVIDENCE AND STONINGTON STEAMSHIP COMPANY v. CLARE’S ADMINISTRATRIX. ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF N'EW TORE. No. 265. Argued April 26,1888. Decided May 14, 1888. In this case, which was an a
Freedman's Saving & Trust Co. v. Shepherd
FREEDMAN’S SAVING AND TRUST COMPANY v. SHEPHERD. SHEPHERD v. THOMPSON. 'APPEALS EKOM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. Nos. 230, 256. Argued April 17, 18, 1888. Decided April 30, 1888. When a mortgage contains no provision for
Noyes v. Mantle
NOYES v. MANTLE. APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME .COURT OF THE TERRITORY OF MONTANA. No. 242. Argued and Submitted April 19, 1888. Decided April 30, 1888. When the location of a mineral lode or vein, properly made, is perfected under the law, the l
United States v. Beebe
UNITED STATES v. BEEBE. APPEAL FROM THE , CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS. No. 180. Argued February 10, 13, 1888. Decided April 30, 1888. The Attorney'General has authority, under the Constitution, to
Culbertson v. H. Witbeck Co.
CULBERTSON v. THE H. WITBECK COMPANY. ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN. No. 217. Argued April 11, 1888.— Decided April 30, 1888. The statutes of Michigan require the attestation of two wit
Cameron v. Hodges
CAMERON v. HODGES. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE. No. 208. Argued April 5, 1888. Decided April 30, 1888. A petition by defendant for removal of a eause from a state court, on the gr
Colton v. Colton
COLTON v. COLTON. COLTON v. COLTON. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. Nos. 228, 229. Argued April 18, 16, 1888. Decided April 30, 1888. The intention of a testator, as expressed in his will,
Cornell v. Weidner
CORNELL v. WEIDNER. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN. No. 240. Argued April 19, 1888. Decided April 30, 1888. A patent for a bushing, or tapering ring of metal, for the bungs of casks,
United States ex rel. Angarica v. Bayard
UNITED STATES ex rel. ANGARICA v. BAYARD. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. No. 1241. Argued January 5, 1888. Decided April 30, 1888. On a petition for a writ of mandamus to the Secretary of State to compel him to pay
Bayard v. United States ex rel. White
BAYARD v. UNITED STATES ex rel. WHITE. ERROR to the supreme court of THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. No. 938. Argued October 11, 12, 1887. Decided April 30, 1888. In answer to a petition for a writ of mandamus to be issued to the Secretary of Sta
Porter v. White
PORTER v. WHITE. APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. No. 221. Argued April 12,1888. —Decided April 30, 1888. In this ease it was held, on the facts, that the plaintiff in a suit in equity had not established his right
De Saussure v. Gaillard
DE SAUSSURE v. GAILLARD. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OP THE STATE OP SOUTH CAROLINA. No. 205. Argued and Submitted April 4, 1888. Decided April 30, 1888. It appearing that, before reaching and deciding the federal question discussed here, th
Jones's Administrator v. Craig
JONES’S ADMINISTRATOR v. CRAIG. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA. No. 235. Submitted April 18, 1888. —Decided April 30, 1888. A brought ejectment against B. B thereupon filed a bill in equity,
United States v. Broadhead
UNITED STATES v. BROADHEAD. UNITED STATES v. BROADHEAD. ■ error to the circuit court of the united states for the DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. Nob. 233, 234. Argued April 18, 1888. Decided April 30, 1888. On the authority of United States v. Hil
California v. Central Pacific Railroad
CALIFORNIA v. CENTRAL PACIFIC RAILROAD CO. SAME v. SOUTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD CO. SAME v. NORTHERN RAILWAY CO. SAME v. CALIFORNIA PACIFIC RAILROAD CO. SAME v. CENTRAL PACIFIC RAILROAD CO. SAME v. CENTRAL PACIFIC RAILROAD CO. ERROR TO THE CIR
Minneapolis & St. Louis Railway Co. v. Herrick
MINNEAPOLIS AND ST. LOUIS RAILWAY COMPANY v. HERRICK. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. No. 202. Argued April 2, 3, 1888. Decided April 23, 1888. This case is affirmed ou the authority of Missouri Pacific Railway Co. v.
Missouri Pacific Railway Co. v. Mackey
MISSOURI PACIFIC RAILWAY COMPANY v. MACKEY. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OE THE STATE OF KANSAS. No. 218. Argued April 12, 1888. Decided April 23, 1888. Tbe statute of Kansas of 1874, c. 93, § 1, p. 143, Comp. Laws Kansas, 1881, p. 784, which
Peoria & Pekin Union Railway Co. v. Chicago, Pekin & Southwestern Railroad
PEORIA AND PEKIN UNION RAILWAY COMPANY v. CHICAGO, PEKIN AND SOUTHWESTERN RAILROAD COMPANY. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OE THE UNITED STATES EOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OE ILLINOIS. No. 210. Argued April 6, 1888. Decided April 23, 1888. A r
Whitbeck v. Mercantile National Bank
WHITBECK v. MERCANTILE NATIONAL BANK OF CLEVELAND. . APPEAL EEOM THE CIRCUIT COURT OE THE UNITED STATES EOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OE OHIO. No. 970. Argued March 20, 1888.— Decided April 23, 1888. The auditor of Cuyahoga County, Ohio, fixed
United States v. Louisiana
UNITED STATES v. LOUISIANA. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF CLAIMS. No. 1388. Submitted April 02, 1888. Decided April 23, 1888. A claim by the State of Louisiana to 5 per cent of the net proceeds of the sales of the lands of the United States, und
Forncrook v. Root
FORNCROOK v. ROOT. APPEAL' FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF. OHIO. No. 225. Argued April 13, 1888. —Decided April 23, 1888. Letters-patent No. 243,674, granted to James Forncrook, June 28, 1881, for a
Norton v. Dyersburg
NORTON v. DYERSBURG. ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE. No. 207. Argued April 5, 1888. Decided April 23, 1888. In this case, certain negotiable bonds issued by the town of Dyersburg, Tenne
Kelley v. Milan
KELLEY v. MILAN. ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE. No. 206. Argued April 4, 5, 1888. Decided April 23, 1888. In this case certain negotiable bonds, issued by the town oí Milan, Tennessee,
Gleason v. District of Columbia
GLEASON v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. APPEAL PROM THE COURT OF CLAIMS. No. 216. Argued April 10, 1888. Decided April 23, 1888. 6. performed work for tbe District of Columbia, and received therefor in January, 1874, certificates of indebtedness o
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.