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
Waterman v. Canal-Louisiana Bank & Trust Co.
WATERMAN v. THE CANAL-LOUISIANA BANK AND TRUST COMPANY, EXECUTOR. APPEAL PROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OP THE UNITED STATES FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OP LOUISIANA. No. 306. Submitted February 25, 1909. Decided November 8, 1909. The equity jurisdict
United States v. Mescall
UNITED STATES v. MESCALL. ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK. No. 278. Argued October 14, 1909. Decided November 8, 1909. The rule of ejusdem generis, that where the particular words of desc
Mullen v. Fornoff
No. 502. R. G. Mullen, Appellant, v. Fred Fornoff, Captain, etc. November 1, 1909. Mr. William P. Borland for appellant. No appearance for appellee.
International Textbook Co. v. City of Ottumwa
No. 33. International Textbook Company, Appellant, v. The City of Ottumwa. November 1, 1909. Mr. David C. Harrington for appellant. No appearance for appellee.
Kuykendall v. Union Pacific Railroad
No. 520. John A. Kuykendall, Administrator, etc., Petitioner, v. The Union Pacific Railroad Company. November 1, 1909. Mr. D. W. Wood for petitioner. Mr. Robert S'. Lovett for respondent.
Reavis v. Fianza
REAVIS v. FIANZA. APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME CQURT OP THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS. No. 16. Argued April 26, 27, 1909. Decided November 1, 1909. This court has jurisdiction of this case; for, even if the requisite amount is not involved, the meaning
Fall v. Eastin
FALL v. EASTIN. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEBRASKA. No. 24. Submitted April 30, 1909. Decided November 1, 1909. While a court of equity acting upon the person of the defendant may decree á conveyance of land in another juri
Hood Rubber Co. v. Atlantic Mutual Insurance
No. 625. The Hood Rubber Company, Petitioner, v. The Atlantic Mutual Insurance Company. October 18, 1909. Mr. Harrington Putnam for petitioner. .Mr, John G. Müburn and Mr. Walter F. Taylor for respondent.
Androvette v. Steamship-Baralong
No. 618. E. E. Androvette, Petitioner, v. The Steamship-Baralong, etc. October 18, 1909. Mr. William S. Montgomery for petitioner. Mr. J, Parker Kirlin and Mr. John M. Woolsey for respondent.
Boland v. The Steam Vessel Oceanica
No. 608. John J. Boland et al., Petitioners, v. The Steam Vessel Oceanica, etc. October 18, 1909. Mr. George Clinton for petitioners. Mr. Thomas C. Burke for respondent.
Hub Construction Co. v. Hobbs
No. 517. Hub Construction Company, Petitioner, v. Nathaniel W. Hobbs, Trustee. October 18, 1909. Mr. Thomas G. Frost for petitioner. Mr. Edwin G. Eastman for respondent.
Pyman Steamship Co. v. Mexican Central Railway Co.
No. 475. Pyman Steamship Company, Limited, Petitioner, v. Mexican Central Railway Company, Limited. October 18, 1909. Mr. J. Parker Kirliri for petitioner. Mr. Joseph H. Choate, Jr., for respondent.
American Wood Working Machinery Co. v. Union Trust Co.
No. 457. American Wood Working Machinery Company et al., Petitioners, v. The Union Trust Company et al. October 18, 1909. Mr. Charles A. Douglas for petitioners. No appearance for respondents.
MacKenzie v. MacKenzie
MacKENZIE v. MacKENZIE. ERROR T.O THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS. No. 465. Motion to dismiss submitted October 11, 1909. Decided October 18, 1909. A writ of error to review the judgment of the highest court of a State dismissed
Crook v. International Trust Co.
No. 403. Harrison Crook, Plaintiff in Error, v. International Trust Company of Maryland. October 11, 1909. Mr. Wilton J. Lambert for plaintiff in error. Mr. Walter C. Clephane and Mr. W. Calvin Chesnut for defendant in error.
Hadley v. Scoville
No. 78. W. B. Hadley, Acting Auditor of Porto Rico, Appellant, v. H. H. Scoville, Clerk, et al. October 11, 1909. Mr. Henry M. Hoyt, 2d., for appellant. Mr. N. B. K. Pettingill for appellees
United States v. William R. Trigg Co.
No. 3. United States of America, Suing at the Costs and for the Benefit of Penn Iron Company, Limited, Plaintiff in Error, v. William R. Trigg Company and Virginia Trust Company. October 11, 1909. Mr. George Bryan for plaintiff in error. Mr
Kretsinger v. Brown
No. 864. F. S. Kretsinger, Trustee, Petitioner, v. John H. Brown, as Executor, etc., et al. June 1, 1909. Mr. Henry T. Rogers for petitioner. Mr. Henry A. Dubbs for respondents.
Expanded Metal Co. v. Bradford
EXPANDED METAL COMPANY v. BRADFORD. GENERAL FIREPROOFING COMPANY v. EXPANDED METAL COMPANY. CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT. CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT. Nos. 66, 606. Ar
English v. Territory of Arizona ex rel. Griffith
ENGLISH v. TERRITORY OF ARIZONA ex rel. GRIFFITH, TREASURER OF PIMA COUNTY. APPEAL PROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE TERRITORY OF ARIZONA. No. 180. Submitted April 26, 1909 Decided June 1, 1909. Where there is doubt as to the construction of a
Weems Steamboat Co. of Baltimore v. People's Steamboat Co.
WEEMS STEAMBOAT COMPANY OF BALTIMORE v. PEOPLE’S STEAMBOAT COMPANY. CERTIORARI TQ THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT. No. 181. Argued April 26, 1909. Decided June 1, 1909. A wharf on a navigable stream is private property a
International Mercantile Marine Co. v. Stranahan
INTERNATIONAL MERCANTILE MARINE COMPANY v. STRANAHAN. SAME v. SAME. IN ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR. THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK. Nos. 510, 511. Argued January 11, 12, 1909. Decided June 1, 1909. Decided on the
Oceanic Steam Navigation Co. v. Stranahan
OCEANIC STEAM NAVIGATION COMPANY v. STRANAHAN. ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF, THE UNITED, STATES FOR THE ' • , ‘ SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW. YORK. No. 509. Argued January 11, 12, 1909, Decided June 1, 1909. Money paid to the collector of a po
United States v. National Exchange Bank of Providence
UNITED STATES v. NATIONAL EXCHANGE BANK OF PROVIDENCE. ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OP APPEALS POR THE FIRST CIRCUIT. No. 90. Argued January 25, 26, 1909. Decided June 1, 1909. The United States can recover from a bank presenting pension chec
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.