Find court opinions that match your case.
Search 312,996+ 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
1903 Cases
273 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
Kinney v. Eastern Trust & Banking Co.
No. 506. Isaac N. Kinney et al., Petitioners, v. The Eastern Trust and Banking Company. December 21, 1903. Mr. O. W. Aldrich and Mr. Alfred J. Thomas for petitioners. Mr. William B. Sanders for respondent.
White v. United States
WHITE v. UNITED STATES. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OP CLAIMS. ' No. 75. Argued November 11, 12, 1903. Decided December 21, 1903. Retrospective legislation is not favored. Unless the intention that a law is to have a retrospective operation is cl
Toltec Ranch Co. v. Babcock
TOLTEC RANCH COMPANY v. BABCOCK. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OP THE STATE OP UTAH. No. 49. Argued November 3, 1903. Decided December 21, 1903. Adverse possession under claim of right for the period prescribed by the statute of limitations of
Toltec Ranch Co. v. Cook
TOLTEC RANCH COMPANY v. COOK ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF UTAH. No. 48. Argued November 3, 1903. Decided December 21, 1903. Adverse possession, gives a title to land together with the remedies which attach to the title as effe
Spencer v. Duplan Silk Co.
SPENCER v. DUPLAN SILK COMPANY. ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIR- ' CUIT. No. 83. Argued December 7,1903. Decided December 21, 1903. A suit does not arise under the Constitution and laws of the United States uhless a
Hughes v. Harrison
No. 500. Eugene Hughes et al., Petitionees, v. A. Harrison, Master, etc. December 14, 1903. Mr. Anthoñy Higgins and Mr. Henry Galbraith Ward, for petitioners. Mr. John F. Lewis for respondents.
Spreckels v. Wittman
No. 105. J. D. Spreckels, Appellant, v. George W. Wittman, Chief of Police, etc. December 14, 1903. Mr. J. C. Campbell, Mr. W. II. Metsori and Mr. E. F. Preston for appellant. Mr. Henry C. McPike for appellee.
Warner, Barnes & Co. v. Stranahan
No. 331. Warner, Barnes & Co. (Limited), Plaintiff in Error, v. Nevada N. Stranahan. Argued December 4, 1903. Decided December 14, 1903. Mr. Frederic R. Coudert, Jr., Mr. Paul Fuller and Mr. Henry M. Ward for plaintiff in error. The Attorne
Deposit Bank v. Frankfort
DEPOSIT BANK v. FRANKFORT. ERROR TO THE COTJRT OP APPEALS OF THE STATE OP KENTUCKY. No. 33. Argued October 20, 21, 1903. Decided December 14, 1903. A right claimed under the Federal Constitution, finally adjudicated in the Federal courts, c
Beasley v. Texas & Pacific Railway Co.
BEASLEY v. TEXAS & PACIFIC RAILWAY CO. APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES CIRCUIT COURT’bF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT. No. 79. Argued December 3, 1903. Decided December 14, 1903. A railroad company on receiving from the plaintiff a conveyance
Pennsylvania R. R. v. Hughes
PENNSYLVANIA R. R. CO. v. HUGHES. Bi-R.-R.n-R. TO THE SUPREME COURT ON THE STATE-OP PENNSYLVANIA. No. 56. Argued November 6,,1903. Decided December 7, 1903. A bill of lading was given in New York State for transporting a horse to a point in
Baltimore & Potomac R. R. v. Landrigan
BALTIMORE & POTOMAC R. R. CO. v. LANDRIGAN. ERROR TO THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. No. 71. Argued November 10,11,1903. Decided December 7, 1903 In the absence of evidence to the contrary there is a presumption that pne w
Schuyler National Bank v. Gadsden
SCHUYLER NATIONAL BANK v. GADSDEN. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OP THE STATE OP NEBRASKA. No. 50. Argued November 3, 1903. Decided December 7, 1903. Where usurious interest has been paid to a national bank the remedy afforded by see. 5198, U.
Norfolk & Western Railway Co. v. Sims
NORFOLK AND WESTERN RAILWAY CO. v. SIMS. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OP THE STATE OP NORTH CAROLINA. No. 74. Argued November 12, 1903. Decided December 7, 1903. The States have no power to tax directly, or by license' iipon the importer, goo
French Republic v. Saratoga Vichy Spring Co.
THE FRENCH REPUBLIC v. SARATOGA VICHY SPRING CO. CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT. No. 53. Argued November 4, 1903. Decided December 7, 1903. 1. .Geographic names often acquire a secondary -signification ind
Guaranty Co. v. Pressed Brick Co.
GUARANTY CO. v. PRESSED BRICK CO.. CERTIFICATE FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR' THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT. No. 39. Argued October 30, 1903. Decided December 7, 1903. The taking by a materialman of thirty and sixty day notes for materials sup
Arbuckle v. Blackburn
ARBUCKLE v. BLACKBURN. APPEAL PROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE' SIXTH CIRCUIT. No. 66. Argued November 10, 1903. Decided December 7, 1903. Where the jurisdiction of the Circuit Court is invoked on the ground of diverse citizenship
Jeung Lin Heung v. United States
No. 113. Jeung Lin Heung, Appellant, v. United States. December 3, 1903. Dismissed, per stipulation, on motion of Mr. Solicitor General Hoyt for the appellee. Mr. Lyman I. Mowry for appellant. The Attorney General fof'ttap-pellee.
First National Bank v. Chicago Title & Trust Co.
No. 479. First National Bank of Chicago et al., Petitioners, v. Chicago Title and Trust Company, Trustee, etc. November 30, 1903. Mr. Wallace Heckman and Mr. Henry 8. Bobbins for petitioners. Mr. Joseph E. Baden and Mr. Newton Wyeth for res
Northern Securities Co. v. United States
NORTHERN SECURITIES COMPANY v. UNITED STATES. APPEAL PROM THE UNITED STATES CIRCUIT COURT POR THE DISTRICT OP MINNESOTA. No. 277. Submitted November 16, 1903. Decided November 30, 1903. Motion for leave to file brief as amicus curias denied
State Board of Assessors v. Comptoir National d'Escompte
STATE BOARD OF ASSESSORS v. COMPTOIR NATIONAL D’ESCOMPTE. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT .OF LOUISIANA. No. 157. Argued October 28, 29, 1903. Decided November 30, 1903, There is no inhibition in
Wisconsin & Michigan Railway Co. v. Powers
WISCONSIN AND MICHIGAN RAILWAY CO. v. POWERS. . ' APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OP THE UNITED STATES FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN. No. 77. Submitted November 13, 1903. Decided November 30, 1903. A provision in a general tax law that
Anglo-American Provision Co. v. Davis Provision Co. No. 2
ANGLO-AMERICAN PROVISION CO. v. DAVIS PROVISION CO. No. 2. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK. No. 63. Argued November 9, 1903. Decided November 30, 1903. When the Circuit Court has deci
Anglo-American Provision Co. v. Davis Provision Co. No. 1
ANGLO-AMERICAN PROVISION CO. v. DAVIS PROVISION CO. No. 1. ERROR TO THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK. No. 64. Argued November 6, 9, 1903. Decided November 30, 1903. Consistently with Article IV, § 1, of the Constitution of the
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.