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
Minneapolis, St. Paul & Sault Ste. Marie Railway Co. v. Doughty
MINNEAPOLIS, ST. PAUL AND SAULT STE. MARIE RAILWAY COMPANY v. DOUGHTY. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OP THE STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA. No. 81. Argued December 17, 1907. Decided February 3, 1908. Under the act of March 3, 1875, c. 152, 18 Stat. 482
Missouri Valley Land Co. v. Wrich
MISSOURI VALLEY LAND COMPANY v. WRICH. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEBRASKA. No. 102. Argued January 10, 1908. Decided February 3, 1908. Decided on authority of Missouri Valley Land Co. v. Wiese, ante, p. 234. The facts are s
Missouri Valley Land Co. v. Wiese
MISSOURI VALLEY LAND COMPANY v. WIESE. ERROR TO THE SUPREME. COURT OF THE STATE OF NEBRASKA. No. 101.- Argued January 10, 1908. Decided February 3, 1908. Where a judge of the highest court "of a State, in allowing a writ of error, • adds to
Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railway Co. v. United States
No. 552. The Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railway Company, Petitioner, v. The United States. January 27, 1908. Petition for a writ of certiorari to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit granted. Mr. 0. M-i Spence
Elder v. Wood
ELDER v. WOOD. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF COLORADO. No. 95. Argued January 9, 1908. Decided January 27, 1908. Á valid subsisting mining location, such as the Comstock lode, or an interest therein, is property distinct from t
Penn Refining Co. v. Western New York & Pennsylvania Railroad
PENN REFINING COMPANY, LIMITED, v. WESTERN NEW YORK AND PENNSYLVANIA RAILROAD COMPANY. ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT. No. 27. Argued October 18, 21, 1907. Decided January 27, 1908. An order of the Interstate Co
United States v. A. Graf Distilling Co.
UNITED STATES v. A. GRAF DISTILLING COMPANY. PERTIFICATE FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT. No. 24. Argued December 16, 1907. Decided January 27, 1908. A revenue statute containing provisions of a highly penal nature
Braxton County Court v. West Virginia ex rel. State Tax Commissioners
BRAXTON COUNTY COURT v. THE STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA ex rel. THE STATE TAX COMMISSIONERS. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA. No. 124. Submitted January 14, 1908. Decided January 27, 1908. Speaking generally,
Adair v. United States
ADAIR v. UNITED STATES. ERROR TO THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY. No. 293. Argued October 29, 30, 1907. Decided January 27, 1908. It is not within the power of Congress to make it a criminal offe
Houghton v. Meyer
HOUGHTON v. MEYER, POSTMASTER GENERAL. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE DISTRICT OP COLUMBIA. No. 49. Argued November 12, 1907. Decided January 20, 1908. While the restraining order authorized by § 718, Rev. Stat., is a species of te
Ex parte Simon
Ex parte SIMON. PETITION FOE WRITS OF HABEAS CORPUS AND CERTIORAEI. No. 13, Original. Argued January 6, 7, 1908. Decided January 20, 1908. The usual rule is that a prisoner cannot anticipate the regular course of proceedings having for thei
Southern Pine Lumber Co. v. Ward
SOUTHERN PINE LUMBER COMPANY v. WARD. ERROR TO AND APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE TERRITORY OF OKLAHOMA. No. 82. Submitted December 17, 1907. Decided January 20, 1908. Although the record was not docketed until more than thirty days a
I. M. Darnell & Son Co. v. City of Memphis
I. M. DARNELL & SON COMPANY v. CITY OF MEMPHIS. IN ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF TENNESSEE. No. 75. Argued December 16, 1907. Decided January 20, 1908. While a State may tax property which has moved in the channels of interstat
Marquez v. Maxwell Land Grant Co.
No. 278. Jose Dolores Marquez et al., Appellants, v. The Maxwell Land Grant Company. Appeal from the Supreme Court of the Territory of New Mexico. January 16, 1908. Dismissed with costs on motion of counsel for appellants. Mr. Frank W. Clan
Sailors' Union of the Pacific v. Hammond Lumber Co.
No. 546. Sailors’ Union of the Pacific et al., Petitioners, v. Hammond Lumber Company. January 13, 1908. Petition for a writ of certiorari to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied. Mr. Jackson H. Ralston fo
Durein v. Kansas
No. 7. Fritz Durein, Plaintiff in Error, v. The State of Kansas; Fred Ross et al., Plaintiffs in Error, v. The State of Kansas; and Fred. Simmons et al., Plaintiffs in Error, v. The State of Kansas. No. 8. No. 9. In error to the Supreme Cou
Re Metropolitan Railway Receivership
Re METROPOLITAN RAILWAY RECEIVERSHIP. PETITIONS FOR WRITS OF MANDAMUS. Nos. 11, 12, Original. Argued December 9, 1907. Decided January 13, 1908. An unsatisfied, justiciable claim of some right involving the jurisdictional amount made by a c
Blacklock v. United States
BLACKLOCK, EXECUTOR OF RINALDO P. SMITH v. UNITED STATES. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF CLAIMS. No. 65. Argued December 10, 1907. Decided January 13, 1908. A mere recital in an act, whether of fact or of law, is not conclusive unless it be clear
Prosser v. Finn
PROSSER v. FINN. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE' OF WASHINGTON. No. 64. Submitted December 4, 1907. Decided January 13, 1908. If an entryman’s entry is good when made and the Land Department, by error of law, adjudges the land to b
Bluthenthal v. Jones
BLUTHENTHAL v. JONES. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA. No. 94. Submitted December 18, 1907. Decided January 6, 1908. Courts are not bound to search the records of other courts and give effect • to their judgments, and one
Winslow v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad
WINSLOW v. BALTIMORE AND OHIO RAILROAD COMPANY. IN ERROR TO THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. -• ' No. 59. Argued December 9, 10, 1907. Decided January 6, 1908. The objection, taken by a property owner in a condemnation proc
Wabash Railroad v. Adelbert College of Western Reserve University
WABASH RAILROAD COMPANY v. ADELBERT COLLEGE OF THE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF OHIO. No. 40. Argued November 6, 7, 1907. Decided January 6, 1908. Where the Federal questions are clearly presented,
United States v. Miller
UNITED STATES v. MILLER. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF CLAIMS. No. 90. Submitted December 16, 1907. Decided January 6, 1908. Under §§ 1098 and 1261, Rev. Stat., and the opening clause of the Navy Personnel Act of March 13, 1899, 30 Stat. 1004, a
Yosemite Gold Mining & Milling Co. v. Emerson
YOSEMITE GOLD MINING AND MILLING COMPANY v. EMERSON. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. No. 69. Argued December 13, 1907. Decided January 6, 1908. The object of requiring the posting of the preliminary notice of mining c
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.