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
1908 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. Cerecedo Hermanos y Compañia
UNITED STATES v. CERECEDO HERMANOS y COMPAÑIA. APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR PORTO RICO. No. 152. Submitted March 5, 1908. — Decided April 6, 1908. When the meaning of a statute is doubtful the construction given b
Allemannia Fire Insurance v. Firemen's Insurance ex rel. Wolfe
ALLEMANNIA FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY OF PITTSBURG v. FIREMEN’S INSURANCE COMPANY OF BALTIMORE, TO THE USE OF WOLFE, RECEIVER. ERROR TO THE COURT OP APPEALS OP THE DISTRICT OP COLUMBIA. No. 180. Argued March 17, 18, 1908. Decided April 6, 1908.
National Life Insurance Co. of the United States v. National Life Insurance
NATIONAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. NATIONAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY. APPEAL FEOM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT. ' No. 162. Argued March 9, 1908. Decided April 6, 1908. Even if the power
United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. United States ex rel. Struthers Wells Co.
UNITED STATES FIDELITY AND GUARANTY COMPANY v. UNITED STATES FOR THE USE AND BENEFIT OF STRUTHERS WELLS COMPANY. ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT. No. 154. Argued March 5, 1908. Decided April 6, 1908. There is al
Garzot v. de Rubio
GARZOT v. de RUBIO. BURSET v. SAME. BURSET v. SAME. APPEALS PROM THE DISTRICT COURT OP THE UNITED STATES FOR PORTO RICO. Nos. 141, 142, 604. Argued February 27, 28, 1908. Decided April 6, 1908. The power of this court to review judgments of
McCabe & Steen Construction Co. v. Wilson
McCABE & STEEN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY v. WILSON. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OP THE TERRITORY OF OKLAHOMA, No. 155. Argued March 5, 6, 1908. Decided April 6, 1908. Defendant who introduces testimony after the demurrer to plaintiff’s evidence h
Lipphard v. Humphrey
LIPPHARD v. HUMPHREY. ERROR TO AND APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. No. 188. Argued March 20, 1908. Decided April 6, 1908. Inability to read does not create a presumption that a testator does not know the conten
Saxlehner v. Wagner
No. 632. Emilie Saxlehner, Petitioner, v. Edward Wagner et al. March 23, 1908. Mr. Antonio Knauth, Mr. Frank F. Reed and Mr. Arthur von Briesen for petitioner. Mr. Walter F. Murray for respondents.
Thomas v. Iowa
THOMAS v. STATE OF IOWA. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OP THE STATE OP IOWA.' No. 533. Argued February 26, 1908. Decided March 23, 1908. In order to give this court jurisdiction under ,§ 709, Rev. Stat., to- review the judgment of a state cour
Asbell v. Kansas
ASBELL v. STATE OF KANSAS. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF KANSAS. No. 166. Submitted March 6, 1908. Decided March 23, 1908. While the State may not legislate for the direct control of interstate commerce, a proper police regulat
Hutchins v. Munn
HUTCHINS v. MUNN. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMEIA. No. 163. Argued March 10, 1908. Decided March 23, 1908. The measure of protection to be given by the undertaking required on issuing a restraining order under §
Dotson v. Milliken
DOTSON v. MILLIKEN. ERROR TO THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. No. 48. Argued March 4, 5, 1908. Decided March 23, 1908. A broker employed to sell land subject to a requirement of the purchaser which the vendor declares will
General Oil Co. v. Crain
GENERAL OIL COMPANY v. CRAIN, INSPECTOR OF COAL OIL. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE ST.-jTE OF TENNESSEE. No. 128. Argued January 23, 1908. Decided March 23, 1908. Where complainant is entitled to equitable relief against the enforcement
Hunter v. Wood
HUNTER, SHERIFF OF BUNCOMBE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA, v. WOOD. APPEAL FROM .THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA. No. 474. Argued December 18, 19, 1907. Decided March 23, 1908. Where the Circuit Co
Ex parte Young
Ex parte YOUNG. PETITION FOR WRITS OF HABEAS. CORPUS AND CERTIORARI. No. 10, Original. Argued December 2, 3, 1907. Decided March 23, 1908. While this court will not take jurisdiction if it should not, it must take jurisdiction if it should.
Interstate Commerce Commission v. Chicago Great Western Railway Co.
INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION v. CHICAGO GREAT WESTERN RAILWAY COMPANY. APPEAL PROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OP THE UNITED STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS. No. 73. Argued April 16, 17, 1907. Decided March 23, 1908. Railroads are the
Hallowell v. United States
HALLOWELL v. UNITED STATES. CERTIFICATE FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT. No. 175. Argued March 12, 1908. Decided March 23, 1908. The authority given by § 6 of the Judiciary Act of March 3, 1891, 26 Stat. 826, to the
Bosque v. United States
BOSQUE v. UNITED STATES. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS. No. 147. Submitted January 29, 1908. Decided March 23, 1908. ■Under the Treaty of Paris of 1898, between the United States and Spain, a Spanish resident of the P
Roderick Lean Manufacturing Co. v. Kuelling
No. 554. The Roderick Lean Manufacturing Company, Plaintiff in Error, v. Reinhart Kuelling. Motion to dismiss, or affirm submitted March 9, 1908. Decided March 16, 1908. Mr. Sardius D. Bentley for plaintiff in- error. Mr. Eugene Van Voorhis
Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railway Co. v. United States
CHICAGO, BURLINGTON AND QUINCY RAILWAY COMPANY, PETITIONER, v. UNITED STATES. CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT. No. 552. Submitted January 22, 1908. Decided March 16, 1908. Decided on the authority of Armour
Armour Packing Co. v. United States
ARMOUR PACKING COMPANY v. UNITED STATES. SWIFT AND COMPANY v. SAME. MORRIS AND COMPANY v. SAME. CUDAHY PACKING COMPANY v. SAME. CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS POR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT. Nos. 467, 468, 469, 470. Argued January 20, 2
Smith v. Rainey
SMITH v. RAINEY. APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE TERRITORY OF ARIZONA. No. 144. Argued March 3, 4, 1908. Decided March 16, 1908. A partner has a lien on the firm’s assets for the repayment of his advances to the firm, and in this case
O'Reilly de Camara v. Brooke
MARIA FRANCISCA O’REILLY de CAMARA, COUNTESS OF BUENA VISTA, v. BROOKE, MAJOR GENERAL, U. S. A. ERROR TO THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK. No. 104. Argued February 28, March 2, 1908. Decided Marc
Gray v. Equitable Mortgage Co.
No. 276. Anderson Gray, Appellant, v. The Equitable Mortgage Company of Kansas City, Mo., et al. March 13, 1908. Mr. Thomas F. Doran for appellant. No appearance for appellees.
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.