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
1904 Cases
244 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
Atlantic Lumber Co. v. L. Bucki & Son Lumber Co.
No. 612. Atlantic Lumber Company et al., Petitioners, v. L. Bucki & Son Lumber Co. et al. March 14, 1904.
Eaton v. Brown
EATON v. BROWN. APPEAL FROM AND ERROR TO THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TH® DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. No. 171. Submitted March 3,1904. Decided March 14, 1904. Courts do not incline to regard a will as conditional where it reasonably can be held that t
Northern Securities Co. v. United States
NORTHERN SECURITIES COMPANY v. UNITED STATES. APPEAL • FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA. No. 277. Argued December 14, 15,1903. Decided March 14, 1904. Stockholders of the Great Northern and Northern
Roper v. Scurlock
No.' 179. Ward Roper et al., Plaintiffs in Error, v. A. C. Scurlock et al. In error to the Court of Civil Appeals for the Fifth Supreme Judicial District of th'e State of Texas. March 7, 1904.
Stevens v. Smith
No. 586. Oscar Hampton Stevens, Petitioner, v. Richmond Smith et al. March 7, 1904.
Hodges v. Colcord
HODGES v. COLCORD. APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE TERRITORY OF OKLAHOMA. No. 155. Submitted February 23,1904. Decided March 7, 1904. A homestead entry which is prima facie valid, although made by one in fact disqualified to make the e
Winous Point Shooting Club v. Caspersen
WINOUS POINT SHOOTING CLUB v. CASPERSEN. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF OHIO. No. 153. Argued February 24,1904. Decided March 7, 1904. Federal questions cannot be raised in this court which did not arise below, and where no Fede
Cimiotti Unhairing Co. v. American Fur Refining Co.
No. 590. Cimiotti Unhairing Company et al., Petitioners, v. American Fur Refining Company et al. February 29, 1904.
In re Schofield
No. —. Original. Ex parte. In the Matter of Arthur P. Schofield, Petitioner. February 29, 1904.
Security Land & Exploration Co. v. Weckey
SECURITY LAND AND EXPLORATION COMPANY v. WECKEY. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OP THE STATE OP MINNESOTA. No. 128. Argued January 19,1904. Decided February 29, 1904. Argued simultaneously with, by the same counsel, and on the same briefs as, N
Security Land & Exploration Co. v. Burns
SECURITY LAND AND EXPLORATION COMPANY v. BURNS. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. No. 127. Argued January 19,1904. Decided February 29, 1904. The general rule that in matters of boundaries natural monuments or objects wi
Miller v. Northern Assurance Co.
No. 594. Robert Miller, Special Master, etc., Plaintiff in Error, v. Northern Assurance Company. In error to the District Court of the United States for the District of Porto Rico. February 23, 1904.
Lindstrom v. International Navigation Co.
No. 572. Nils O. Lindstrom, Administrator, etc., Petitioner, v. International Navigation Company. February 23, 1904.
Giles v. Teasley, Board of Registrars
GILES v. TEASLEY, BOARD OF REGISTRARS OF MONTGOMERY COUNTY, ALABAMA. GILES v. TEASLEY. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF AUABAMA.. Nos. 337, 338. Argued January 5,1904. Decided February 23, 1904. The right of this court to review t
Delaware Indians v. Cherokee Nation
DELAWARE INDIANS v. CHEROKEE NATION. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF CLAIMS. No. 240. Argued December 1, 2,1903. Decided February 23, 1904. In a suit brought under § 25 of the act of June 28, 1898, 30 Stat. 495, by the Delaware Indians residing in
United States v. Choctaw Nation
UNITED STATES v. THE CHOCTAW NATION AND THE CHICKASAW NATION. THE CHICKASAW FREEDMEN v. THE CHOCTAW NATION AND THE CHICKASAW NATION. APPEALS FROM THE COURT OF CLAIMS. Nos. 322, 323. Argued January 26,27,1904. Decided February 23, 1904. The
Julian v. Central Trust Co.
JULIAN v. CENTRAL TRUST COMPANY. CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OR APPEALS ROR THE ROURTH CIRCUIT. No. 139. Argued January 21, 22,1904. Decided February 23, 1904. While the decision of the highest court of a State is entitled to the highes
Leigh v. Green
LEIGH v. GREEN. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OE THE STATE OF NEBRASKA. No. 119. Argued January 13,1904. Decided February 23, 1904. Where-the claim that a state statute is unconstitutional is first made on a motion for rehearing in' the highes
Ah How v. United States
AH HOW alias LOUIE AH HOW v. UNITED STATES. CHU DO alias CHU GEE v. UNITED STATES. LEW GUEY v. UNITED STATES. YUNG LEE v. UNITED STATES. APPEALS. FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF. THE UNITED STATES FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK. Nos. 307,
Minneapolis & St. Louis Railroad v. Minnesota ex rel. Railroad & Warehouse Commission
MINNEAPOLIS AND ST. LOUIS RAILROAD COMPANY v. STATE OF MINNESOTA ex rel. THE RAILROAD AND WAREHOUSE COMMISSION. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. No. 138. Argued January 21,1904. Decided February 23, 1904. Where the cons
American Book Co. v. State of Kansas ex rel. Nichols
AMERICAN BOOK COMPANY v. THE STATE OF KANSAS ex rel. NICHOLS. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF KANSAS. No. 126. Argued January 15,18,1904. Decided February 23, 1904. It, is the duty of this court to decide actual controversies by
Montague & Co. v. Lowry
MONTAGUE & COMPANY v. LOWRY. ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT. No. 46. Submitted October 27,1903. Decided February 23, 1904. An association was formed in California by manufacturers of, and dealers in, tiles, mant
Cincinnati Street Railway Co. v. Snell
CINCINNATI STREET RAILWAY COMPANY v. SNELL. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OP THE STATE OP OHIO. No. 124. Argued January-14,1904. Decided February 23, 1904. The Fourteenth Amendment safeguards fundamental rights and not the mere form which a St
Grand Rapids & Indiana Railway Co. v. Osborn
GRAND RAPIDS AND INDIANA RAILWAY COMPANY v. OSBORN. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN. No. 61. Argued November 6, 1903. Decided February 23, 1904. Where the determination by the state court of an alleged ground of estoppel
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.