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
1902 Cases
226 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
Minneapolis & St. Louis Railroad v. Minnesota
MINNEAPOLIS & ST. LOUIS RAILROAD COMPANY v. MINNESOTA. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. No. 131. Argued January 23, 24, 1902. — Decided June 2, 1902. The act of the Legislature of Minnesota, creating a railroad commissi
Chesapeake & Potomac Telephone Co. v. Manning
CHESAPEAKE AND POTOMAC TELEPHONE COMPANY v. MANNING. APPEAL FEOM THE COUET OF APPEALS OF THE DISTEICT OF COLUMBIA. No. 363. Argued March 10, 11, 1902. — Decided June 2, 1902. The Court of Appeals made a complete disposition of the controver
Jenkins v. Neff
JENKINS v. NEFF. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK. No. 198. Argued March 20, 1902. Decided June 2, 1902. Section 55 of the Laws of 1893, cli. 196, simply places trust companies on an equality with hanks, whether corporate
Hardy v. United States
HARDY v. UNITED STATES. ERROR TO THE DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ALASKA. No. 502. Submitted April 28, 1902. Decided June 2, 1902. The action of a trial court, upon an application for a continuance, is purely a matter of discretion, a
Bienville Water Supply Co. v. Mobile
BIENVILLE WATER SUPPLY COMPANY v. MOBILE. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA. No. 126. Argued January 22, 23, 1902. Decided June 2, 1902. The plaintiff took its charter with notice that i
Clark v. Herington
CLARK v. HERINGTON. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF KANSAS. No. 223. Submitted April 14, 1902. — Decided June 2, 1902. While the two statutes making the Únion Pacific Railroad grants did not double the price of the even numbered
Chin Ying v. United States
CHIN YING v. THE UNITED STATES. APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK. No. 526. Argued March 13, 14, 1902. Decided June 2, 1902.
Chin Bak Kan v. United States
CHIN BAK KAN v. UNITED STATES. CHIN YING v. UNITED STATES. APPEALS FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK. Nos. 525, 526. Argued March 13, 14, 1902. Decided June 2, 1902. The ruling in United Stat
Hanover National Bank v. Moyses
HANOVER NATIONAL BANK v. MOYSES. ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE. No. 203. Argued and submitted April 7, 1902. Decided June 2, 1902. Tlie bankruptcy law of 1898 is not unconstitutional b
Hatfield v. King
HATFIELD v. KING. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA. No. 221. Submitted May 2, 1002. Decided June 2, 1902. . This case having been decided below on demurrer, and having been brought to this
Gallaway v. Fort Worth Bank
GALLAWAY v. FORT WORTH BANK. MOTION TO SUE OUT WRIT OF ERROR; WITHOUT GIVING BOND REQUIRED BY LAW. Submitted May 19, 1902. Decided June 2, 1902. The act of Congress of July 20, 1892, 27 Stat. 252, has no application to proceedings in this c
Lung v. Patterson
LEE LUNG v. PATTERSON. APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON. No. 189. Argued and submitted April 21, 1902. Decided May 19, 1902. Under the statutes referred to in the opinion of the court, jurisdict
Williams v. Gaylord
WILLIAMS v. GAYLORD. CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT. No. 208. Argued April 8, 9, 1902. Decided May 19, 1902. This suit was brought by petitioner, as trustee of a mortgage. Meld,, that when a corporation sel
Nesbitt v. United States
NESBITT v. UNITED STATES. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF CLAIMS. No. 578. Submitted April 18, 1902. — Decided May 19, 1902. This was an appeal from a judgment of the Court of Claims, sustaining a plea to the jurisdiction of the court to hear a pe
Ward v. Joslin
WARD v. JOSLIN. CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT. No. 245. Argued April 30, 1902. Decided May 19, 1902. As between creditor and stockholder the provision of the'Constitution of Kansas that “dues from corporat
Bowker v. United States
BOWKER v. UNITED STATES. ERROR TO THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY. No. 247. Argued April 30, May 1, 1902. Decided May 19, 1902. Cases in which the jurisdiction of the District or Circuit Courts of the
Felsenheld v. United States
FELSENHELD v. UNITED STATES. CERTIFICATE FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOE THE FOURTH CIRCUIT. No. 205. Argued April 7, 8, 1902. Decided May 19, 1902. It is within the power of Congress to prescribe that a package of any article which i
Beyer v. LeFevre
BEYER v. LeFEVRE. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. No. 237. Argued April 25, 28, 1902. Decided May 19, 1902. The agreement of parties to submit questions to a jury, the trial there, and a stipulation for returni
Murphy v. Utter
MURPHY v. UTTER. APPEAL EEOM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE TERRITORY OF ARIZONA. No. 388. Argued March 7, 10 1902. Decided May 19, 1902. By an act passed in 1887 the territorial legislature of Arizona constituted a Board of Loan Commissioners fo
Bement v. National Harrow Co.
BEMENT v. NATIONAL HARROW COMPANY. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK. No. 215. Argued April 9, 10, 1902. Decided May 19, 1902. Any one sued upon a contract may set up, as a defence, that it is a violation of an act of Cong
McClaughry v. Deming
McCLAUGHRY v. DEMING. APPEAL EEOM THE CIECUIT COUET FOE THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS. No. 610. Argued April 28, 29, 1902. —Decided May 19, 1902. The trial of an officer of volunteers by a court-martial, all the members of which were officers of t
Emsheimer v. New Orleans
EMSHEIMER v. NEW ORLEANS. CERTIFICATE FROM THE UNITED STATES CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT. No. 347. Argued March 19, 20, 1902. Decided May 19, 1902. A certificate under section six of the act of 1891 should contain a prope
Montana Mining Co. v. St. Louis Mining & Milling Co.
MONTANA MINING COMPANY v. ST. LOUIS MINING AND MILLING COMPANY. MONTANA MINING COMPANY v. ST. LOUIS MINING AND MILLING COMPANY. ERROR TO THE UNITED STATES CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT. Nos. 213, 214. Argued April 9, 1902.
The Styria, Scopinich v. Munroe
THE STYRIA, SCOPINICH, CLAIMANT, v. MORGAN. SAME v. PARSONS. SAME v. MALCOLMSON. SAME v. MUNROE. CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT. Nos. 72, 73, 74, 76. Argued November 22, 25, 1901. Decided May
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.