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
1891 Cases
306 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
Insurance Co. of North America v. Hibernia Insurance
INSURANCE COMPANY OF NORTH AMERICA v. HIBERNIA INSURANCE COMPANY. APPEAL PROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR TH% EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA. No. 14. Argued December 3, 1889. Decided May 25, 1891. A contract of-reinsurance to
In re Rahrer
In re RAHRER, Petitioner. AUREAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS. No. 1529. Argued March 17, 1891. Decided May 25, 1891. The act of August 8, 1890, 26 Stat. 313, c. 728, enacting “that all fermented, d
Williams v. Heard
WILLIAMS v. HEARD. ERROR TO THE SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT OP THE STATE OP MASSACHUSETTS. No. 375. Argued May 1, 1891. Decided May 25, 1891. When the judgment of a state court is against an assignee in bankruptcy-in an action between him and th
Marchand v. Griffon
MARCHAND v. GRIFFON. ERROR TO TEE CIRCUIT COURT OP THE UNITED STATES EOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OP LOUISIANA. No. 124. Argued and submitted December 19, 1890. Decided May 25, 1891. In Louisiana a married woman, sued upon a promissory note sig
Albright v. Oyster
ALBRIGHT v. OYSTER. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOE THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI. No. 133. Argued and submitted January 6, 1891. Decided May 25, 1891. This suit is brought to determine the legal effect of a will,
Clark Thread Co. v. Willimantic Linen Co.
CLARK THREAD COMPANY v. WILLIMANTIC LINEN COMPANY. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR. THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY. No. 31. Argued October 22, 23, 1890. Decided May 25, 1891. The invention for winding thread upon spools,
In re Ross
In re ROSS, Petitioner. APPEAL PROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OP THE UNITED STATES POR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OP NEW YORK. No. 1683. Argued April 30, May 1, 1891. Decided May 25, 1891. By the Constitution of the United States a government is ordaine
United States v. Van Duzee
UNITED STATES v. VAN DUZEE. APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT .OP THE UNITED STATES FOK THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA. No. 1244. Reported on page 169, ante. This correction announced May 25, 1891. The court makes a correction in paragraph seve
Stein v. Bienville Water Supply Co.
STEIN v. BIENVILLE WATER SUPPLY COMPANY. APPEAL PROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OP THE UNITED STATES POB THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OP ALABAMA, No. 344. Argued April 28,1891. Decided May 11, 1891. A contract with a municipal corporation, whereby the corp
Lewisburg Bank v. Sheffey
LEWISBURG BANK v. SHEFFEY. APPEAL PROM THE DISTRICT COURT OP THE UNITED STATES POR THE DISTRICT OP WEST VIRGINIA. No. 338. Argued April 23, 1891. Decided May 11, 1891. An application for rehearing, made after the adjournment of the term at
Gleeson v. Virginia Midland Railroad
GLEESON v. VIRGINIA MIDLAND RAILROAD COMPANY. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. No. 287. Argued April 6, 1891. Decided May 11, 1891. A land slide in a railway cut, caused by an ordinary fall of rain, is not an “act of
Higgins v. Keuffel
HIGGINS v. KEUFFEL. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK. No. 290. Argued April 7, 8, 1891. Decided May 11, 1891. A label placed upon a bottle to designate its contents is not a subject fo
Wan Shing v. United States
WAN SHING v. UNITED STATES. APPEAL. FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES' FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. No. 1414. Submitted April 10, 1891. Decided May 11, 1891. The result of the legislation respecting the Chinese would s
Quock Ting v. United States
QUOCK TING v. UNITED STATES APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. No. 638. Submitted April 10, 1891. Decided May 11, 1891. Uncontradictecl evidence of interested witnesses to an improbab
Mitchell v. Smale
MITCHELL v. SMALE. ERROR TO" THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS. No. 167. Argued January 23, 26, 27, 1891. Decided May 11, 1891. Plaintiff, a citizen of Illinois, sued in ejectment to recover posses
Hardin v. Jordan
HARDIN v. JORDAN. ERROR TO THE' CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED' STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS. No. 161. Argued January 23, 26, 27, 1891. Decided May 11, 1891. In ejectment a plaintiff must stand or fall by his own title, and can
In re Wood
In re WOOD, Petitioner. APPEAL PROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK, No. 1581. Decided May 11, 1891, and reported ante, page 278.
The E. A. Packer, Scully
THE E. A. PACKER, SCULLY Claimant. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK. No. 286. Argued April 3, 6, 1891. Decided May 11, 1891. The general rule, which prevails in cases tried by a Circui
Marsh v. Nichols, Shepard & Co.
MARSH v. NICHOLS, SHEPARD & CO. ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF CALHOUN COUNTY, STATE OP MICHIGAN. No. 136. Argued January 6, 1891. Decided May 11, 1891. A bill in equity in a state court, with jurisdiction over the parties, brought to enforc
Essex Public Road Board v. Skinkle
ESSEX PUBLIC ROAD BOARD v. SKINKLE. EEEOE TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY No. 262. Submitted March 25, 1891. Decided May 11, 1891. An executive agency, created by a statute of a State for the purpose of improving public high
Lent v. Tillson
LENT v. TILLSON. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. No. 144. Argued January 8, 9, 1891. Decided May 11, 1891. The Statute of California, of March 23, 1876, entitled “ An act to authorize the widening of Dupont Street in
Humphreys v. McKissock
HUMPHREYS v. McKISSOCK. WABASH, ST. LOUIS & PACIFIC RAILWAY COMPANY v. McKISSOCK. APPEALS FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT' OF THE UNITED STATES FOB THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA. Nos. 296, 991. Argued April 8, 1891. Decided May 11, 1891. Several rai
Rogers v. Durant
ROGERS v. DURANT. EEEOE TO THE CIRCUIT CQURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOE THE NOETHEEN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS. No. 318. Submitted April 16, 1891. Decided May 11, 1891. A bank check is a “bill of exchange” within the meaning of that term as used i
In re Shibuya Jugiro
In re SHIBUYA JUGIRO, Petitioner APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF'THE UNITED STATES FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK. No. 1632. Argued and submitted April 10, 1891. Decided May 11, 1891. After..final judgment entered here, affirming a
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.