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
United States v. Baca
UNITED STATES v. BACA. APPEAR FROM THE COURT OF PRIVATE LAND CLAIMS. No. 170. Argued January 31,1902. Decided February 24, 1902. Under tlie act of Congress of March 3, 1891, c. 539, the Court of Private Land Claims has no jurisdiction-to co
O'Brien v. Wheelock
O’BRIEN v. WHEELOCK certiorari to the united states circuit court of appeals foe THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT. No. 38. Argued October 21, 22,1901. Decided February 24, 1902. An unconstitutional law cannot be held valid as to particular parties on th
Waite v. Santa Cruz
WAITE v. SANTA CRUZ. CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT. No. 39. Argued April 24., 25,1901. Decided February 24, 1902. On the facts, as stated in the opinion of the court, the city of Santa Cruz is estopped to
In re the Huguley Manufacturing Co.
In re THE HUGULEY MANUFACTURING COMPANY AND THE ALABAMA AND GEORGIA MANUFACTURING COMPANY, PETITIONERS. ORIGINAL. No number. Submitted November 20, 1901. — Decided February 24, 1902. Where there is a plain and adequate remedy by appeal, a w
Huguley Manufacturing Co. v. Galeton Cotton Mills
HUGULEY MANUFACTURING COMPANY v. GALETON COTTON MILLS. APPEAL FEOM THE UNITED STATES CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOE THE FIFTH CIRCUIT! No. 94. Argued January 15, 1902. Decided February 24, 1902. By the act of March 3, 1891, the judgments and
Terlinden v. Ames
TERLINDEN v. AMES. APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS. No. 475. Argued January 6,7,1902. — Decided February 24, 1902. Extradition proceedings before a committing magistrate thereto duly
Studebaker v. Perry
STUDEBAKER v. PERRY. ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COtiRT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT. No. 122. Argued January 17,20,1802. — Decided February 24, 1902. The single question for the determination of the court in this .case is, whether the Compt
United States v. St. Louis & Mississippi Valley Transportation Co.
UNITED STATES v. ST. LOUIS & MISSISSIPPI VALLEY TRANSPORTATION COMPANY. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF CLAIMS. No. 89. Argued January 10,13,1902. Decided February 24, 1902. After the findings of fact, conclusions of law, and judgment in this case
Minnesota v. Northern Securities Co.
MINNESOTA v. NORTHERN SECURITIES COMPANY. ORIGINAL. No. 10. Original. Argued January 27,1902. — Decided February 24, 1902. Whether a bill in equity, filed in the name of a State, seeking to prevent by injunction a corporation organized unde
Marande v. Texas & Pacific Railway Co.
MARANDE v. TEXAS & PACIFIC RAILWAY COMPANY. ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APFEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT. No. 86. Argued January 8, 9,1902. Decided February 24, 1902. This was an action to recover from the railway company the value of plain
Lykins v. McGrath
LYKINS v. McGRATH. ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS. No. 90. Argued and submitted January 13, 1902. — Decided February 24, 1902. It having been settled by Lomax v. Pickering, 173 U. S. 26, that when
Hatfield v. King
HATFIELD v. KING. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA. No. 221. Submitted November 11, 1901. — Decided February 24, 1902. It is contended by appellants that the decree in the Circuit Court ag
League v. Texas
LEAGUE v. TEXAS. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OE THE STATE OE TEXAS. No. 137. Argued and submitted January 29, 1902. — Decided February 24, 1902. A State may adopt new remedies for the collection of taxes, and apply those remedies to taxes al
Lake Benton First National Bank v. Watt
LAKE BENTON FIRST NATIONAL BANK v. WATT. EEEOE TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. No. 103. Submitted January 15, 1902. Decided February 24, 1902. The provision in Rev. Stat. §5198, that “ in case the greater rate of interest ha
United States v. Ewing
UNITED STATES v. EWING. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF CLAIMS. No. 225. Argued November 12,13,1901. Decided February 24, 1902. Construing the act of March 3, 1883, c. 119, 22 Stat. 487, and the act of June 12, 1866, 14 Stat. 59, both relating to
United States v. Barlow
UNITED STATES v. BARLOW. BARLOW v. UNITED STATES. APPEALS FROM THE COURT OF CLAIMS. Nos. 127, 128. Argued January 23, 1902. Decided February 24, 1902. Under the contract with the United States for the construction of a dry dock which is set
Voigt v. Detroit City
VOIGT v. DETROIT CITY. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN. No. 83. Argued December 6, 1902 Decided February 24, 1902. The Supreme Court of tbe State of Michigan having decided that the amount of taxes in a ease like the pre
Cleveland Trust Co. v. Lander
CLEVELAND TRUST COMPANY v. LANDER. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OP THE STATE OP OHIO. No. 88. Argued January 10, 1902. Decided February 24, 1902. What the constitution of the State of Ohio requires or what the statutes of that State require a
Brainard v. Buck
BRAINARD v. BUCK. APPEAL FKOM THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. No. 110. Argued January 15,16,1902. Decided February 24, 1902. The court below had power to authorize the amendment made to the bill. It is the settled doctrine
Illinois v. Illinois Central Railroad
ILLINOIS v. ILLINOIS CENTRAL RAILROAD COMPANY. APPEAL PROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT. No. 28. Argued March 15,1901. Decided February 3, 1902. This case was before this court in Illinois Central liailroad Company v
McDonald v. Thompson
McDonald v. Thompson. APPEAL FROM THE 'CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT. No. 95. Argued January 13,14, 1902 Decided February 3, 1902. To a bill in equity by a receiver of a national bank to recover an assessment' made by the
King v. Portland City
KING v. PORTLAND CITY. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON. No 307. Argued. November IS, 19,1901. Decided January 27, 1902. Under the facts of this case, and the interpretation given of the charter of the city of Portland by t
United States v. Southern Pacific Railroad
UNITED STATES v. SOUTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT. No. 25. Argued April 18, 19, 1901 January 27, 1902. This case is a continuation of Southern Pacific Railroad Company v. Unit
Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. Eubank
LOUISVILLE & NASHVILLE RAILROAD COMPANY v. EUBANK. ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF SIMPSON COUNTY, STATE OF KENTUCKY. No. 10. Argued November 8,11,1901. Decided January 27, 1902. Section. 218 of the constitution of the State of Kentucky, read
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.