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
1912 Cases
280 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
The Abby Dodge
THE ABBY DODGE. . APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES . FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA. No. 41. Argued November 6, 7, 1911. Decided February 19, 1912. Each State-owns the beds of all tide waters within its jurisdiction
Kiernan v. Portland, Oregon
KIERNAN v. PORTLAND, OREGON. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON. No. 503. Argued November 3, 1911. Decided February 19, 1912. Pacific States Telephone Co. v, Oregon, ante, p. 118, followed to the effect that the determination
Pacific States Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. Oregon
PACIFIC STATES TELEPHONE AND TELEGRAPH COMPANY v. OREGON. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON. No. 36. Argued November 3, 1911. Decided February 19, 1912. The enforcement of the provision in § 4 of Art. IV of the Constitution
Cherokee Nation & United States v. Whitmire
CHEROKEE NATION AND UNITED STATES v. WHITMIRE, TRUSTEE FOR FREEDMEN OF THE CHEROKEE NATION. APPEAL PROM THE COURT OP CLAIMS. No. 735. Argued January 9, 10, 1912. Decided January 29, 1912. As after a decree of the Court of Claims in favor of
United States ex rel. Lowe v. Fisher
UNITED STATES EX REL. LOWE v. FISHER, SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR. ERROR TO THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, No. 445. Argued November 14, 1911. Decided January 29, 1912. Whew- the Court of Claims has kept control of a Cu.se r
Waskey v. Hammer
WASKEY v. HAMMER. CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT. No. 84. Argued December 7, 1911. Decided January 22, 1912. A discovery of mineral within the limits of a mining claim is essential to its validity; proximit
Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. F. W. Cook Brewing Co.
LOUISVILLE & NASHVILLE RAILROAD CO. v. F. W. COOK BREWING CO. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT. No. 64. Submitted November 13, 1911. Decided January 22, 1912. This, court has jurisdiction of an appeal from th
United States v. Wong You
UNITED STATES v. WONG YOU. CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT. No. 597. Argued January 12, 1912. Decided January 22, 1912. The Alien Immigration Act of February 20, 1907, e. 1134, § 36, 34 Stat. 898, 908, appl
Noble v. Gallardo
NOBLE v. GALLARDO y SEARY. APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED. STATES FOR PORTO RICO. No. 147. Submitted December 22, 1911. Decided January 22, 1912. A court of equity being, a novelty in Porto Rico, it would be unjust to apply it
Quong Wing v. Kirkendall
QUONG WING v. KIRKENDALL, TREASURER OF LEWIS AND CLARK COUNTY, MONTANA. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA. No. 119. Argued December 18, 1911. Decided January 22, 1912. A State does not deny equal protection' of the laws by
Anderson v. Inhabitants of Bordentown
No. 803. William Anderson and Robert Barry, Partners, etc., Plaintiffs in Error, v. The Inhabitants of the City of Bordentown, N. J. In error to .the.Court of Errors and Appeals of the State of New Jersey. Motion to dismiss submitted Januar
Mondou v. New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad
SECOND EMPLOYERS’ LIABILITY CASES. MONDOU v. NEW YORK, NEW HAVEN & HARTFORD RAILROAD CO. NORTHERN PACIFIC RAILWAY CO. v. BABCOCK. NEW YORK, NEW HAVEN & HARTFORD RAILROAD CO. v. WALSH. WALSH v. NEW YORK, NEW HAVEN & HARTFORD RAILROAD CO. ERR
Diaz v. United States
DIAZ v. UNITED STATES. APPEAL FBlOM THE COURT OF CLAIMS. No. 90. Argued December 11, 12, 1911. — Decided January 15, 1912. Herrera v. United States, ante, p. 558, followed as to the nature and effect of, and liability of the United States f
Herrera v. United States
HERRERA v. UNITED STATES. APPEAL PROM THE COURT OP CLAIMS. No. 89. Argued December 11, 12, 1911. — Decided January 15, 1912. War makes the citizens or subjects of one belligerent enemies of the government, citizens and subjects of the other
Fitz Gerald v. Thompson
FITZ GERALD v. THOMPSON. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OP THE STATE OP PENNSYLVANIA. No. 849. Submitted December 18, 1911. — Decided January 15, 1912. Where the record plainly shows that to convert a party defendant' into- a party plaintiff wo
Interstate Commerce Commission v. Union Pacific Railroad
INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION v. UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY. SAME v. NORTHERN PACIFIC RAILWAY COMPANY. SAME v. GREAT NORTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY. APPEALS FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OP THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA. Nos. 451,
Johnson v. Collier
JOHNSON v. COLLIER. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF ALABAMA. No. 104. Argued December 14, 15, 1911. — Decided January 9, 1912. The. bankrupt is not divested’of his property by filing a petition in bankruptcy. He is still the owne
Keeney v. Comptroller of New York
KEENEY, AS ADMINISTRATOR, v. COMPTROLLER OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK. ERROR TO THE SURROGATE’S COURT OF THE COUNTY OF KINGS, STATE OF NEW YORK. No. 81. Argued December 6, 1911. — Decided January 9, 1912. The statute of New York of 1896, provid
Soliah v. Heskin
SOLIAH v. HESKIN ET AL., DRAIN COMMISSIONERS OF TRAILL COUNTY, NORTH DAKOTA. ERROR TO THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAILL COUNTY, STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA. No. 76. Argued December 5, 1911. — Decided January 9, 1912. The Fourteenth Amendment does not
United States v. Barnes
UNITED STATES v. BARNES. ERROR TO THE DISTRICT COURT OP THE UNITED STATES FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY. No. 565. Argued October 24, 1911. — Decided January 9, 1912. The maxim expressio unius est exclusio alterius is a rule of constr
Robinson v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad
ROBINSON v. BALTIMORE AND OHIO RAILROAD COMPANY. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA. No. 17. Submitted April 28, 1911. — Decided January 9, 1912. By the Act to Regulate Commerce, Congress has provided a syst
Huse v. United States
HUSE v. UNITED STATES. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF CLAIMS. No. 74. Argued November 17, 1911. — Decided January 9, 1912. A mail service contractor cannot claim that he accepted a contract under misapprehension when between the .time of his prop
Peters v. Broward
PETERS v. BROWARD. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA. No. 49. Argued November 8, 1911. — Decided January 9, 1912. Under the law of Florida, as declared by its highest' court, where there
Porto Rico Sugar Co. v. Lorenzo
PORTO RICO SUGAR COMPANY v. LORENZO. ERROR to the district court of the united states fob PORTO RICO. No. 154. Argued December 22, 1911. — Decided January 9, 1912. A contract will be read in the light of well known conditions; a contract ma
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.