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
1914 Cases
315 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
Sizemore v. Brady
SIZEMORE v. BRADY. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA. No. 59. Submitted November 4, 1914. Decided December 21, 1914. The Original Creek Agreement of March 1, 1901, was not a grant in prossenti which invested the then livin
Drew v. Thaw
DREW, SHERIFF OF COOS COUNTY, NEW HAMPSHIRE, v. THAW. APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE. No. 514. Argued December 11, 1914. Decided December 21, 1914. A State may enact that a conspiracy t
Washington ex rel. Smith v. City of Seattle
No. 476. The State of Washington ex rel. Grant Smith et al., Plaintiffs in Error, v. The City of Seattle. In error to the Supreme Court of the State of Washington. Motion to dismiss or affirm submitted December 7, 1914. Decided December 14,
Texas & Pacific Railway Co. v. Rosborough
TEXAS & PACIFIC RAILWAY COMPANY v. ROSBOROUGH. ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT. No. 357. Argued November 30, 1914. Decided December 14, 1914. Where the cause was removed from the state court to the District Court
Washington v. Miller
WASHINGTON v. MILLER. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA. No. 53. Submitted November 5, 1914. Decided December 14, 1914. Under the original Creek Agreement of March 1, 1901, controlling effect was given to the Creek tribal
Adkins v. Arnold
ADKINS v. ARNOLD. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA. No. 52. Submitted November 5, 1914. Decided December 14, 1914. Under § 16 of the Creek Indian Allotment Act of June 30,1902, c. 1323, 32 Stat. 500, only allotments to li
Shapiro v. United States
SHAPIRO v. UNITED STATES. ERROR TO THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS. No. 93. Argued December 3, 4, 1914. Decided December 14, 1914. In a case remanded to it by the Circuit Court of Appeals, the D
Scotten v. Littlefield
SCOTTEN v. LITTLEFIELD, TRUSTEE OF BROWN, BANKRUPT. APPEAL FROM CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT. No. 439. Motion to dismiss or affirm submitted October 13, 1914. Decided December 14, 1914. Bills of review are on two grounds:
Detroit & Mackinac Railway Co. v. Michigan Railroad Commission
DETROIT AND MACKINAC RAILWAY COMPANY v. MICHIGAN RAILROAD COMMISSION. APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN. No. 209. Argued December 2, 1914. Decided December 14, 1914. As the constitution
McGovern v. Philadelphia & Reading Railway Co.
McGOVERN, ADMINISTRATRIX, v. PHILADELPHIA & READING RAILWAY COMPANY. ERROR TO THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA. No. 430. Argued November 30, 1914. Decided December 14, 1914. Where appellants,
Lovell-McConnell Manufacturing Co. v. Automobile Supply Manufacturing Co.
LOVELL-McCONNELL MANUFACTURING COMPANY v. AUTOMOBILE SUPPLY MANUFACTURING COMPANY. APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO FILE PETITION FOR MANDAMUS OR FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT. No. 722. Motion for l
Easterling Lumber Co. v. Pierce
EASTERLING LUMBER COMPANY v. PIERCE. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI. No. 589. Submitted November 30, 1914. Decided December 14, 1914. A classification based on the use of engines, locomotives and cars propelled by st
Yazoo & Mississippi Valley Railroad v. Wright
YAZOO & MISSISSIPPI VALLEY RAILROAD COMPANY v. WRIGHT. ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT. No. 218. Argued December 2, 1914. Decided December 14, 1914. Where there is no contention as to the meaning of the Employers
Berwind-White Coal Mining Co. v. Chicago & Erie Railroad
BERWIND-WHITE COAL MINING COMPANY v. CHICAGO AND ERIE RAILROAD COMPANY. ERROR TO THE APPELLATE COURT, FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF ILLINOIS. No. 92. Argued December 3, 1914. Decided December 14, 1914. Filing with the Interstate Commerce Commiss
Minneapolis, St. Paul & Sault Ste. Marie Railway Co. v. Leora ex rel. Leora
No. 488. Minneapolis, St. Paul & Sault Ste. Marie Railway Co., Plaintiff in Error, v. Joseph Leora, by John Leora, his Guardian ad litem. In error to the Supreme Court of the State of Wisconsin. Argued December 1, 1914. Decided December 7,
St. Louis Southwestern Railway Co. v. Arkansas
ST. LOUIS SOUTHWESTERN RAILWAY COMPANY v. STATE OF ARKANSAS. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OP THE STATE OP ARKANSAS. No. 119. Argued February 25, 26, 1914. Decided December 7, 1914. While this court is concluded as to the mere construction of
John Ii Estate, Ltd. v. Brown
JOHN Ii ESTATE, LIMITED, v. BROWN. ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT. No. 98. Argued November 13, 1914. Decided December 7, 1914. The decision of the Supreme Court of the Hawaiian Islands, made while the present Te
United States ex rel. Alexander Bryant Co. v. New York Steam Fitting Co.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA FOR THE USE OF ALEXANDER BRYANT COMPANY v. NEW YORK STEAM FITTING COMPANY. ERROR TO THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK. No. 67. Argued November 9, 1914. Decided December 7,
United States v. Louisville & Nashville Railroad
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. LOUISVILLE & NASHVILLE RAILROAD COMPANY. APPEAL FROM THE COMMERCE COURT. No. 39. Argued February 24, 25, 1913. Decided December 7, 1914. The very purpose for which the Interstate Commerce Commission was created w
Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co. v. Hanson
No. 596. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Company, Plaintiff in Error, v. Lena Hanson, as Executrix, etc. In error to the Circuit Court of Ozaukee County, State of Wisconsin. Motion to dismiss or affirm submitted November 16, 1914. Dec
Anderson v. Swedish Evangelical Mission Covenant of America
No. 64. Peter H. Anderson et al., Appellants, v. The Swedish Evangelical Mission Covenant of America et al. Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Northern District of Illinois. Argued November 6, 1914. Decided November
Garrett v. Louisville & Nashville Railroad
GARRETT, ADMINISTRATOR OF LEWIS v. LOUISVILLE & NASHVILLE RAILROAD COMPANY. ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT. No. 81. Submitted November 12, 1914. Decided November 30, 1914. The Employers’ Liability Act of 1908, p
Fallows v. Continental & Commercial Trust & Savings Bank
FALLOWS v. CONTINENTAL & COMMERCIAL TRUST & SAVINGS BANK, TRUSTEE IN BANKRUPTCY OF TENGWALL COMPANY. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT. No. 69. Argued November 9, 1914. Decided November 30, 1914. First Nationa
Choctaw, Oklahoma & Gulf Railroad v. Harrison
CHOCTAW, OKLAHOMA & GULF RAILROAD COMPANY v. HARRISON, SHERIFF OF PITTSBURG COUNTY, OKLAHOMA. APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA. No. 45. Argued November 3, 4, 1914. Decided November 30,
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.