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
1911 Cases
217 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
Glucksman v. Henkel
GLUCKSMAN v. HENKEL, UNITED STATES MARSHAL. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK. No. 944. Argued April 6, 7, 1911. Decided May 29, 1911. While a person is not to be sent from this country
United States v. Johnson
UNITED STATES v. JOHNSON. •ERROR TO THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI. No. 433. Argued April 13, 1911. Decided May 29, 1911. The term “misbranded” and the phrase defining what amounts to misbrandin
Bean v. Morris
BEAN v. MORRIS. certiorari to the circuit court of appeals for the ninth circuit. No. 122. Argued April 11, 12, 1911. Decided May 29, 1911. Where streams flow through more than one State, it will be presumed, in the absence of legislation o
Fifth Avenue Coach Co. v. City of New York
FIFTH AVENUE COACH COMPANY v. CITY OF NEW YORK. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK. No. 159. Argued April 27, 28, 1911. Decided May 29, 1911. The courts of a State are competent to construe the laws of - the State and to de
Montello Salt Co. v. Utah
MONTELLO SALT COMPANY v. STATE OF UTAH. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF UTAH. No. 136. Argued April 21, 1911. Decided May 29, 1911. The words “and including” following a description do not necessarily mean “in addition to,” but m
United States of America v. American Tobacco Co.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. AMERICAN TOBACCO COMPANY. AMERICAN TOBACCO COMPANY v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. APPEALS FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK. Nos. 118, 119. Argued January 3, 4, 5, 6,
Benson v. Dolan
No. 430. John A. Benson, Appellant, v. L. J. Dolan, Sheriff, etc. Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Northern District of California. May 29, 1911. ' Mr. Joseph C. Campbell for the appellant. The Attorney General for
Marks & Rawolle v. United States
No. 1048. Marks & Rawolle, Petitioners, v. The United States. May 29, 1911. Mr. Benjamin A. Leve.it for the petitioners. The Attorney General, The Solicitor General and Mr. Assistant Attorney General Lloyd for the respondent.
American Disappearing Bed Co. v. Arnaelsteen
No. 1039. The American Disappearing Bed Company, Petitioner, v. Edward Arnaelsteen. May 29, 1911. Mr. Melville Church for the petitioner. No appearance for the respondent.
Atkinson v. United States
No. 1021. A. K. Atkinson, Petitioner, v. The United States. May 29, 1911. Mr. Robert T. Hough and Mr. J. R. Saussy for the petitioner. The Attorney General and The Solicitor General for the respondent.
United States v. Wong You
No. 1051. The United States, Petitioner, v. Wong You et al. May 29, 1911. The Attorney General, The Solicitor General and Mr. Assistant Attorney General Harr for the petitioner. No appearance for the respondents.
Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway Co. v. Bailey
No. 205. Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway Company of Texas, Plaintiff in Error, v. Harry C. Bailey. Error to the Court of Civil Appeals for the Fifth Supreme Judicial District of the State of Texas. Supplemental motion to dismiss or affirm
Gompers v. Bucks Stove & Range Co.
GOMPERS v. BUCKS STOVE & RANGE COMPANY. CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. No. 372. Argued January 27, 30, 1911 Decided May 15, 1911. An order of a court of equity, restraining defendants from-boycotting, compla
Texas & New Orleans Railroad v. Gross
TEXAS & NEW ORLEANS RAILROAD COMPANY v. GROSS. ERROR to the court of civil appeals for the fourth SUPREME JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF TEXAS. No. 832. Submitted April 17, 1911. Decided May 15, 1911. Decided on authority of Texas & New
Texas & New Orleans Railroad v. Miller
TEXAS & NEW ORLEANS RAILROAD COMPANY v. MILLER. ERROR TO THE COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH SUPREME JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF TEXAS. No. 831. Submitted April 17, 1911. Decided May 15, 1911 The protection of charter rights by
Sargent & Lahr v. Herrick & Stevens
SARGENT & LAHR v. HERRICK & STEVENS. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE CjfF IOWA. No. 149. Argued April 25, 1911. Decided May 15, 1911. The mere location of a land warrant does not operate as a payment of the purchase price and does n
Grand Trunk Western Railway Co. v. Railroad Commission of Indiana
GRAND TRUNK WESTERN RAILWAY COMPANY v. RAILROAD COMMISSION OF INDIANA. ERROR TO THE APPELLATE COURT OF THE STATE OF INDIANA; No. 138. Submitted April 19, 19.11. Decided May 15, 1911. A legislative act by an instrumentality of the State exer
Dreier v. United States
DREIER v. UNITED STATES. DREIER v. HENKEL, UNITED STATES MARSHAL. ERROR TO AND APPEAL PROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OP THE UNITED STATES POR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OP NEW YORK. Nos. 358, 359. Argued March 2, 3, 1911. Decided May 15, 1911. Wilson v.
Orient Insurance v. Board of Assessors for the Parish of Orleans
ORIENT INSURANCE COMPANY v. BOARD OF ASSESSORS FOR THE PARISH OF ORLEANS. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF LOUISIANA. No. 397. Argued April 18, 19, 1911. Decided May 15, 1911. Liverpool & London & Globe Insurance Co. v. Assessors,
Liverpool & London & Globe Insurance v. Board of Assessors for Parish of Orleans
LIVERPOOL & LONDON & GLOBE INSURANCE COMPANY v. BOARD OF ASSESSORS FOR THE PARISH OF ORLEANS. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OP THE STATE OP LOUISIANA. No. 92. Argued April 18, 19, 1911. Decided May 15, 1911. Credits on open account are incorpo
Merillat v. Hensey
MERILLAT v. HENSEY. APPEAL PROM THE COURT OP APPEALS OF THE DISTRICT OP COLUMBIA. No. 107. Argued March 17, 1911. Decided May 15, 1911. Both courts below having found that no actual fraud was intended in . this case, this court considered.o
Dowdell v. United States
DOWDELL v. UNITED STATES. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OP THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS. No. 131. Argued April 20, 1911. Decided May 15, 1911. Under § 5 of the act of July 1, 1902, c: 1369, 32 Stat. 691, unless action taken by the Supreme Court of t
Hallowell v. United States
HALLOWELL v. UNITED STATES. CERTIFICATE FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT. No. 89. Argued March 16, 1911. Decided May 15, 1911. The power of the United States to make rules and regulations respecting tribal lands, the
Tiger v. Western Investment Co.
MARCHIE TIGER v. WESTERN INVESTMENT COMPANY. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE ÓF OKLAHOMA. No. 60. Argued November 30, December 1, 2, 1910; restored to docket for reargument January 23, 1911; reargued March 1, 2, 1911. Decided May 15
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.