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
1899 Cases
187 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
Deposit Bank of Owensboro v. Daviess County
Deposit Bank of Owensboro v. Daviess County. No. 150. No. 669, Argued with ante, 636, and by the same counsel. Decided April 3, 1899.
Deposit Bank of Owensboro v. Owensboro
DEPOSIT BANK OF OWENSBORO v. OWENSBORO. ERROR TO THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF KENTUCKY. No. 149. Argued February 27, 28, 1899. Decided April 3, 1899. Citizens’ Savings Sank of Owensboro v. Owensboro, ante, 636, followed, This case w
Citizens' Savings Bank of Owensboro v. Owensboro
CITIZENS’ SAVINGS BANK OF OWENSBORO v. OWENSBORO. ERROR TO THE COURT OR APPEALS OF THE STATE OF KENTUCKT. No. 669. Argued February 27, 28, 1899. Decided April 3, 1899. The questions raised by tlie eighth and ninth assignments of error, rela
Henderson Bridge Co. v. Henderson City
HENDERSON BRIDGE COMPANY v. HENDERSON CITY. ERROR TO THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF KENTUCKY. No. 32. Argued May 6, 9, 1898. Decided April 3, 1899. This court has jurisdiction to review the final judgment of the state court in this ca
Duluth & Iron Range Railroad v. Roy
DULUTH AND IRON RANGE RAILROAD COMPANY v. ROY. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. No. 221. Submitted March 10, 1899. Decided April 3, 1899. When a patent of public lands is obtained by inadvertence and mistake; to the inj
Guarantee Co. v. Mechanics' Savings Bank & Trust Co.
GUARANTEE COMPANY v. MECHANICS’ SAVINGS BANK AND TRUST COMPANY. CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT. No. 224. Argued March 16, 1899. Decided April 3, 1899. A Circuit Court of Appeals is without jurisdiction to r
Pope v. Louisville, New Albany & Chicago Railway Co.
POPE v. LOUISVILLE, NEW ALBANY & CHICAGO RAILWAY COMPANY. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH ' CIRCUIT. No. 303. Submitted January 30, 1899. Decided April 3, 1899. When the jurisdiction of a Circuit Court of the United
Cooper v. Newell
COOPER v. NEWELL. CERTIFICATE FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT. No. 134. Argued January 12, 13, 1899. Decided April 3, 1899. In 1850 McGrael, a resident citizen in Brazoria County, Texas, brought an action against New
The Chattahoochee
THE CHATTAHOOCHEE. CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT. No. 27. Argued March 6, 1899. Decided April 3, 1899. The Golden Rule, a Canadian topsail schooner with twelve sails, all of which with a small exception sh
Guthrie National Bank v. Guthrie
GUTHRIE NATIONAL BANK v. GUTHRIE. ERROR TO AND APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE TERRITORY OF OKLAHOMA. No. 133. Submitted January 13, 1899. Decided April 3, 1899. In ascertaining the jurisdictional amount on an appeal to this court, it
Nicol v. Ames
NICOL v. AMES. In re NICHOLS. SKILLEN v. AMES. INGWERSEN v. UNITED STATES. NO. 435. NO. 4. NO. 625. NO. 636. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILL
Blythe v. Hinckley
BLYTHE v. HINCKLEY. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. No. 367. Submitted January 30, 1899. Decided April 3, 1899. It appearing from the opinion of the Circuit Judge that the various bills in this case we
Medbury v. United States
MEDBURY v. UNITED STATES. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF CLAIMS. No. 225. Argued March 17, 1899. Decided April 3, 1899. Under the act of June 16, 1880, c. 244, the Court of Claims has jurisdiction of an action to recover an excess of payment for
Allen v. Southern Pacific Railroad
ALLEN v. SOUTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. No. 144. Argued January 17, 1899. Decided April 3, 1899. The sixth section of the act of March 3, 1891, c. 517, did not change the limit of t
Brown v. Hitchcock
BROWN v. HITCHCOCK. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. No. 581. Argued February 23, 24, 1899. Decided April 3, 1899. Under the act of September 28, 1850, c. 84, 9 Stat. 519, known as the Swamp Land Act, the legal
United States v. New York Indians
UNITED STATES v. NEW YORK INDIANS. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF CLAIMS. No. 697. Submitted January 30, 1899. Decided March 20, 1899. After the "hearing of the former appeal in this case, 170 U. S. 1, and after the decree of this court determini
Turner v. Wilkes County Commissioners
TURNER v. WILKES COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA. No. 642. Submitted February 20, 1899. Decided March 20, 1899. On a writ of error to a state court this court cannot take jurisdiction undes; t
Third Street & Suburban Railway Co. v. Lewis
THIRD STREET AND SUBURBAN RAILWAY COMPANY v. LEWIS. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT. No. 212. Submitted March 10, 1899. Decided March 20, 1899. Under the act of August 13, 1888, c. 866, a Circuit Court of the United S
Ex parte Ward
Ex parte HENRY WARD. ORIGINAL. No number. Submitted February 20, 1899. Decided March 20, 1899. Where a court has jurisdiction of an offence and of the accused, and the proceedings are otherwise regular, a conviction is lawful although the j
State Bank of Ambia v. Chicago Title & Trust Co.
No. 719. State Bank of Ambia v. Chicago Title and Trust Company. Seventh Circuit. Mr. Daniel Eraser and Mr. Otto Gresham for petitioner. Mr.. Samuel O. Pickens and Mr. Smiley 3. Chambers opposing.
Remington Paper Co. v. Watson
REMINGTON PAPER COMPANY v. WATSON. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF LOUISIANA. No. 146. Argued January 17, 18, 1899. Decided March 13, 1899. On the facts stated in the opinion, the court holds that.the plaintiff in error, a New Yo
Yerke v. United States
YERKE v. UNITED STATES. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF CLAIMS. No. 664. Submitted February 20, 1899. Decided March 13, 1899. Under the clause in the act of March 3, 1885, c. 341, regarding claims “ on behalf of citizens of the United States, on a
Smith v. Burnett
SMITH v. BURNETT. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. No. 112. Argued January 6, 9, 1899. Decided March 18, 1899. Undoubtedly there was jurisdiction in admiralty in this case, iñ the courts below. Although a wharfi
German Insurance Co. of Freeport v. First National Bank of Boonville
No. 159. German Insurance Company of Freeport, Illinois, v. First National Bank of Boonville, New York. Error to the Supreme Court of the State of Kansas. Submitted January 18, 1899. Decided March 6, 1899. Mr. A. P. Jetmore for plaintiff in
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.