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
Iron Gate Bank v. Brady
IRON GATE BANK v. BRADY. ERROR TO THE UNITED STATES CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE EASTERN , DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA. No. 175. Argued February 28, March 3,1902. Decided March 24, 1902. A tort by which the estate of the defendant was not increased, and
Emblen v. Lincoln Land Co.
EMBLEN v. LINCOLN LAND COMPANY. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT. No. 147. Submitted January 29,1902. Decided March. 24, 1902. While a contest over a preemption entry was pending, Congress passed an act confir
Arivaca Land & Cattle Co. v. United States
ARIVACA LAND AND CATTLE COMPANY v. UNITED STATES. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF PRIVATE LAND CLAIMS. No. 153. Argued January 29, 1902. Decided March 24, 1902. The decree of the Court of Private Land Claims denying confirmation of the grant invol
Ainsa v. United States
AINSA v. UNITED STATES. APPEAL FROM THE COURT. OF PRIVATE LAND CLAIMS. No. 40. Argued January 29,1902. Decided March 17, 1902. This case is governed by Reloj Cattle- Company v. United States, just decided. The grant was a grant by quantity,
Reloj Cattle Co. v. United States
RELOJ CATTLE COMPANY v. UNITED STATES. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF PRIVATE LAND CLAIMS. No. 30. Argued and submitted October 21, 1901. Decided March 17, 1902. Ainsa v. United States, 161 U. S. 208, reaffirmed. The grant asked to be confirmed w
Patton v. Brady
PATTON v. BRADY, EXECUTRIX. ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT. OE THE UNITED STATES FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA. No. 1. Argued December 6,1901. Decided March 17, 1902. A case arises under the Constitution of the United States, when the ri
Busch v. Jones
BUSCH v. JONES. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. No. 96. Argued January 14, 1902. Decided March 17, 1902. The aippellees’ contention as to jurisdiction in this case is not justified for reasons expressed in Clar
Moore v. Ruckgaber
MOORE v. RUCKGABER. .CERTIFICATE FROM THE UNITED STATES CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT. No. 295. Argued November 21,1901. Decided March 17, 1902. The war tax law of 1898 does not apply to intangible personal property locate
Eidman v. Martinez
EIDMAN v. MARTINEZ. CERTIFICATE FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF- APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT. No. 287. Argued November 21, 1901. Decided March 17, 1902. Congress is bound to express its intention to tax in clear and unambiguous language, and a
United States v. Camou
UNITED STATES v. CAMOU. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF PRIVATE LAND CLAIMS. No. 35. Submitted March 22,1901. — Decided March 17, 1902. From its examination of the evidence in this case this court concurs in the view of the Court of Private Land C
Connolly v. Union Sewer Pipe Co.
CONNOLLY v. UNION SEWER PIPE COMPANY. ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF rUUINOIS. No. 46. Argued April 22, 23, 1901.— Decided March 10, 1902 If a claim is made in the Circuit Court that a state enactment is invalid und
Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway Co. v. Elliott
MISSOURI, KANSAS AND TEXAS RAILWAY COMPANY v. ELLIOTT. ERROR TO THE KANSAS CITY COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE STATE OF .MISSOURI. No. 148. Argiied and submitted January 29, 30,1902. Decided March 10, 1902. The Supreme Court of Missouri having ne
Monroe v. United States
MONROE v. UNITED STATES. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF CLAIMS. No. 98. Submitted January 14,1902. Decided March 10, 1902. The approval of the Chief of Engineers was necessary to the legal consummation of the contract in this case. A final review
Tullock v. Mulvane
TULLOCK v. MULVANE. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OE THE STATE OE-KANSAS. No. 59. Argued October 25, 28, 1901. — Decided March 3, 1902. The propositions in this case involving Federal questions were duly raised below. Previous to the 'bringing
United States v. Martinez
UNITED STATES v. MARTINEZ. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF PRIVATE LAND CLAIMS. No. 169. Argued and submitted January 31, 1902. Decided March 3, 1902. Under the Court of Private Land Claims Act a party holding from the Spanish or Mexican governmen
Goodrich v. Detroit
GOODRICH v. DETROIT. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OP THE STATE OP MICHIGAN. No. 123. Argued January 20, 1902. — DecidedMarch 3, 1902. Where a statute providing for the opening of streets requires notice to the parties whose laud is to -be tak
Booth v. Illinois
BOOTH v. ILLINOIS. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OE THE STATE OE ILLINOIS. No. 201. Argued November 6, 1901. Decided March 3, 1902. If, looking at all the circumstances which attend, or may ordinarily attend the pursuit of a particular calling
United States v. Rio Grande Dam & Irrigation Co.
UNITED STATES v. RIO GRANDE DAM AND IRRIGATION COMPANY. APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT 'OF THE TERRITORY OF NEW MEXICO. No. 239. Arguetl November 14, 15, 1901. Decided March 3, 1902. The motion made in the court below on behalf of the United
Wilson v. Standefer
WILSON v. STANDEFER. error’ to the court oe. civil appeals eor the third .supreme JUDICIAL DISTRICT OE THE STATE OE TEXAS. No. 105. Argued January 16, 1902. Decided March 3, 1902. This court, whén reviewing the final judgment of a state cou
Detroit v. Detroit Citizens' Street Railway Co.
DETROIT v. DETROIT CITIZENS’ STREET RAILWAY COMPANY. APPEAL FROM THE- CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN. No. 152. Argued November 4,5,1901. Decided March 3, 1902. The Detroit Citizens’ Street Railway Co
Skaneateles Water Works Co. v. Skaneateles
SKANEATELES WATER WORKS COMPANY v. SKANEATELES. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK. No 134. Argued January 24, 27,1902. Decided March 3, 1902. On April 5, 1887, the village of Skaneateles granted a franchise to the waterwor
Schuerman v. Arizona
SCHUERMAN v. ARIZONA. APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE TERRITORY OF ARIZONA. No. 151. Submitted January 28,1902. Decided March 3, 1902. The act of Congress of June 6, 1896, o. 339, 29 Stat. 262, authorizing the refunding of outstanding
Rothschild v. Knight
ROTHSCHILD v. KNIGHT. ERROR TO THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF MASSACHUSETTS. No. 108. Submitted October 21, 1901. Decided March 3, 1902. A motion being made to dismiss the writ of error in this case on the ground that rio. Federal quest
Clark v. Titusville
CLARK v. TITUSVILLE. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OE THE STATE OE PENNSYLVANIA.' No. 91. Argued and submitted January 14, 1902. — Decided March 3, 1902. The city government of Titusville, in Pennsylvania, imposed a license tax upon persons ca
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.