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
1906 Cases
239 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
First National Bank v. Staake
FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF BALTIMORE v. STAAKE. ■ CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT. • No. 213. Argued March 15, 16, 1906. Decided April 30, 1906. Under § 67/ of the bankruptcy law of 1S9S attachments obtained wi
Whitney v. Dick
WHITNEY, WARDEN OF THE IDAHO STATE PENITENTIARY v. DICK. SAME v. SAME. APPEAL FROM AND CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT. Nos. 494, 557. Submitted April 3, 1906. Decided April 30, 1906. Final orders of the Cir
United States v. Cherokee Nation
UNITED STATES v. CHEROKEE NATION. EASTERN CHEROKEES v. CHEROKEE NATION AND UNITED STATES. CHEROKEE NATION v. UNITED STATES. APPEALS FROM THE COURT OP CLAIMS. Nos. 346, 347, 348. Argued January 16, 17, 18, 1906. Decided April 30, 1906. Under
Perez v. Fernandez
PEREZ v. FERNANDEZ. ERROR TO THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF PORTO RICO. No. 1. Argued April 20, 1004. Decided April 23, 1906. The policy of the United States, evidenced in its legislation concerning the islands
Hazelton v. Sheckells
HAZELTON v. SHECKELLS. APPEAL PROM THE COURT OP APPEALS OP THE DISTRICT OP COLUMBIA. No. 225. Argued April 12, 1906. — Decided April 23, 1906. Every part of the consideration for a contract goes equally to the whole promise, and if any part
Oregon v. Hitchcock
OREGON v. HITCHCOCK. IN EQUITY. No. 16, Original. Argued April 5, 6, 1906. — Decided April 23, 1906. Ill the absence of any act of Congress waiving immunity of the United States or consenting that it be sued in respect to swamp lands, eithe
Iowa v. Illinois
IOWA v. ILLINOIS. IN EQUITY. No. 2, Original. Decree entered April 23, 1906. The boundary line between the State of Iowa and the State of Illinois is the middle of the main navigable channel of the -Mississippi river at the places where the
Louisiana v. Mississippi
LOUISIANA v. MISSISSIPPI. DECREE. .IN EQUITY. No. 11, Original. Decree entered April 23, 1906. Defining the boundary line between the States of Louisiana and Mississippi under the opinion in this cáse. Ante, p. 1.
Hastings v. Southern Railway Co.
No. 674. A. M. Hastings, Administrator, Petitioner, v. Southern Railway Company. April 16, 1906. Petition for a writ of certiorari to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied. Mr. J. Altheus Johnson and Mr. J
Westinghouse v. New York Air Brake Co.
No. 662. George Westinghouse, Jr., et al., Petitioners, v. The New York Air Brake Company et al. April 16, 1906. Petition for a writ of''certiorari to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit denied. Mr. George H. C
Skaneateles Paper Co. v. City of Syracuse
No. 69. The Skaneateles Paper Company et al., Plaintiffs in Error, v. The City of Syracuse. In error to the Supreme Court of the State of New York. Argued for plaintiffs in error April 10, 1906. Decided April 16, 1906. Mr. Martin Conboy, Mr
Rawlins v. Georgia
RAWLINS v. GEORGIA. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF GEORGIA. No. 547. Argued April 6, 1906. Decided April 16, 1906. If the state constitution and laws in regard to selection of jurors, as construed by the' state court, are consis
St. John v. New York
ST. JOHN v. NEW YORK. ERROft TO THE SUPREME COURT OP THE STATE OP NEW YORK. No. 210. Argued March 14, 1906. Decided April 16, 1906. A State may classify persons and objects for the purgóse
Powers v. Detroit, Grand Haven & Milwaukee Railway Co.
POWERS, AUDITOR GENERAL OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, v. DETROIT, GRAND HAVEN AND MILWAUKEE RAILWAY COMPANY. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN. No. 394. Argued February 26, 1906. Decided Apr
Haddock v. Haddock
HADDOCK v. HADDOCK. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK. No. 119. Argued December 11, 1905. Decided April 12, 1906. The husband and wife being domiciled in New York, the husband left the wife, acquired, in good faith, after
W. K. Niver Coal Co. v. Cheronea Steamship Co.
No. 655. W. K. Niver Coal Company, Petitioner, v. Cheronea Steamship Company, Limited; W. K. Niver Coal Company, Petitioner, v. Ursula Bright Steamship Company, Limited; W. K. Niver Coal Company, Petitioner, v. New Ruperra Steamship Company
Hitchcock County v. Platt
No. 605. Hitchcock County, Nebraska, Petitioner, v. James B. Platt. April 9, 1906. Petition for a writ of certiorari to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied. Mr. E. R. Duffie for petitioner. Mr. Jesse B.
Cleveland v. Cleveland Electric Railway Co.
CLEVELAND v. CLEVELAND ELECTRIC RAILWAY COMPANY. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO. No. 183. Argued February 27, 28, 1906. Decided April 9, 1906. In construing municipal- ordinances dealing
West Chicago Street Railroad v. People ex rel. City of Chicago
WEST CHICAGO STREET RAILROAD COMPANY v. PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS ex rel. CITY OF CHICAGO. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS. No. 241. Argued January 10, 11, 1906. Decided April 9, 1906. Although the judgment of the
Pope v. Falk
No. 301. Eliza L. Pope, Plaintiff in Error, v. Anna Clara Falk et al. In error to the Supreme Court of- the State of Kansas. April 2, 1906. Dismissed with costs, on-motion of counsel for plaintiff in error. Mr. L. F. Bird for plaintiff in e
United States v. Ninety-nine Diamonds
No. 616. The United States, Petitioner, v. Ninety-nine Diamonds. April 2, 1906. Petition for a writ of certiorari to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit denied. The Attorney General, The Solicitor Gen-eral and
United States v. Wickersham
UNITED STATES v. WICKERSHAM. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF CLAIMS. No. 185. Submitted February 28, 1906. Decided April 2, 1906. . The provisions of the Civil Service Act of January 16,. 1883, are broad and comprehensive; under it, the Executive
The Wildcroft
THE WILDCROFT. CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES CIRCUIT COURT OP APPEALS POR THE THIRD CIRCUIT. No. 127. Argued December 12, 13, 1905. Decided April 2, 1906. The relief afforded by § 3 of the Harter act, 27 Stat. 445, to shipowners is purely
Rodriguez v. Vivoni
RODRIGUEZ v. VIVONI. APPEAL PROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF PORTO RICO. No. 209. Argued March. 14, 1906. Decided April 2, 1906. Remote explanations as to the use and meaning of a word will be rejected when t
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.