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
1909 Cases
264 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
Caliga v. Inter Ocean Newspaper Co.
CALIGA v. INTER OCEAN NEWSPAPER COMPANY. ERROR TO THE UNITED STATES CIRCUIT COURT OP APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT. No. 22. Argued November 5, 1909. Decided November 29, 1909. Statutory copyrightls not to be confoiinded with the exclusive
Louisiana ex rel. Hubert v. Mayor of the New Orleans
LOUISIANA ex rel. HUBERT, RECEIVER, v. MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEW ORLEANS. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OP THE STATE OP LOUISIANA. No. 11. Argued November 1, 2, 1909. Decided November 29, 1909. This court has not jurisdiction to rev
Steward v. American Lava Co.
STEWARD v. AMERICAN LAVA COMPANY. MORITZ KIRCHBERGER v. AMERICAN LAVA COMPANY. CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEARS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT. Nos. 27, 28. Argued November 10, 11, 1909. Decided November 29, 1909. A patent cannot be sustai
Rumford Chemical Works v. Hygienic Chemical Co.
RUMFORD CHEMICAL WORKS v. HYGIENIC CHEMICAL COMPANY OF NEW JERSEY. HYGIENIC CHEMICAL COMPANY OF NEW YORK v. RUMFORD CHEMICAL WORKS. CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT. CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS
Scully v. Squier
SCULLY v. SQUIER ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF IDAHO. No. 21. Argued November 5, 1909. Decided November 29, 1909. Where plaintiff bhses his bill on the contention that under the town-,site law, §2387, -Rev. Stat.,. the ascertai
The Steamship Jefferson
THE STEAMSHIP JEFFERSON. APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THÉ UNITED STATES FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA. No. 243. Submitted May 17, 1909. Decided November 29, 1909. Where the District Court has allowed an appeal, but has not certi
Kenney v. Craven
KENNEY v. CRAVEN. ERROR TO THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF MASSACHUSETTS. No. 31. Argued November 12, 1909. Decided November 29, 1909. The determination by a state court that a purchaser pendente lite from' the trustee of a bankrupt is b
Hanover National Bank v. Suddath
HANOVER NATIONAL BANK OF NEW YORK, APPELLANT, v. SUDDATH, AS RECEIVER OF AMERICAN NATIONAL BANK OF ABILENE (NO. 2). APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND .CIRCUIT. No. 13. Argued April 20, 1909. Decided November 29, 1909.
Hanover National Bank of New York v. Suddath
HANOVER NATIONAL BANK OF NEW YORK v. SUDDATH, RECEIVER OF AMERICAN NATIONAL BANK OF ABILENE. ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OP APPEALS POR THE SECOND CIRCUIT. No. 12. Argued April 20, 1909. Decided November 29, 1909. When a bank refuses to do t
Interstate Commerce Commission v. Stickney
INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION v. STICKNEY AND OTHERS, RECEIVERS OF THE CHICAGO GREAT WESTERN RAILWAY COMPANY. APPEAL PROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OP THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OP MINNESOTA. No. 251. Argued October 12, 1909. Decided Novem
Eddy v. City & County of San Francisco
No. 431. Sarah J. Eddy, Petitioner, v. The City and County of San Francisco. November 15, 1909. Mr. Julius Kahn for petitioner. Mr. A. B. Browne for respondent.
Guaranty Trust Co. v. Metropolitan Street Railway Co.
GUARANTY TRUST COMPANY v. METROPOLITAN STREET RAILWAY COMPANY. APPEAL FROM THE- CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK. No. 607. Motion to dismiss submitted November 8, 1909. Decided November 15, 1909. An a
North Carolina Mining Co. v. Westfeldt
NORTH CAROLINA MINING COMPANY v. WESTFELDT. APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES CIRCUIT COURT OR APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT. No. 580. Motion to dismiss or affirm submitted November 8, 1909. Decided November 15, 1909. An appeal from the Circui
Jerome H. Remick & Co. v. Stern
JEROME H. REMICK & COMPANY v. STERN. ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR .THE ' SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK. No. 352. Submitted November 8, 1909. Decided November 15, 1909. Writ of error to the Circuit Court dismissed for
United States v. Shipp
UNITED STATES v. SHIPP. INFORMATION IN CONTEMPT. No. 4. Original [No. 5, original, of October Term, 1908]. Opinion delivered June 1, 1909. Sentence pronounced November 15, 1909. On June 1, 1909, after the opinion and judgment of the court (
El Paso & Northeastern Railway Co. v. Gutierrez
EL PASO & NORTHEASTERN RAILWAY COMPANY v. GUTIERREZ, ADMINISTRATRIX. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OP THE STATE OF TEXAS. No. 505. Submitted October 11, 1909. Decided November 15, 1909. Where the effect of the judgment of the state court is to
Sylvester v. Washington
SYLVESTER v. THE STATE OF WASHINGTON. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON. No. 40. Argued November 4, 5, 1909. Decided November 15, 1909. Where in the state court plaintiff in error set up the invalidity of a deed under th
McGilvra v. Ross
McGILVRA AND BRESSLER, v. ROSS, STATE LAND COMMISSIONER OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON. APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT. No. 328. Argued October 19, 20, 1909. Decided November 15, 1909. While the con
Marbles v. Creecy
MARBLES v. CREECY, CHIEF OF POLICE. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR .THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI: No. 23. Submitted November 5, 1909. Decided November 15, 1909. The executive of a State upon whom a demand is made
Coffield v. Fletcher Manufacturing Co.
No. 634. Peter T. Coffield et al., Petitioners, v. The Fletcher Manufacturing Company. November 8, 1909. Mr. Richard J. McCarty for petitioners. Mr. Edmund E. Wood for respondent.
Pfaelzer v. Bach Fur Co.
PFAELZER v. BACH FUR COMPANY. ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK. No. 290. Submitted November 1, 1909. Decided November 8, 1909. A writ of error to the Circuit Court of the United States di
Strong v. Gassert
STRONG v. GASSERT. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OP THE STATE OP MONTANA. No. 401. Motion to dismiss or affirm submitted November 1, 1909. Decided November 8, 1909. A writ of error to the highest court of a State dismissed for want of jurisdic
Fleming v. McCurtain
FLEMING v. McCURTAIN. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA. No. 253. Argued October 20, 21, 1909. Decided November 8, 1909. The giant in letters patent, issued in pursuance of the treaty of
United States v. Union Supply Co.
UNITED STATES v. UNION SUPPLY COMPANY. ERROR TO THE DISTRICT COURT OP THE UNITED STATES POR THE DISTRICT OP NEW. JERSEY. No. 120. Argued October 13, 14, 1909. Decided November 8, 1909. .Where corporations are as much within the mischief aim
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.