Find court opinions that match your case.
Search 313,007+ 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
Hollerbach v. United States
HOLLERBACH v. UNITED STATES. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF CLAIMS. No. 250. Argued March 9, 1914. Decided April 6, 1914. A Government contract should be interpreted as are contracts between individuals and with a view of ascertaining the intenti
United States ex rel. Texas Portland Cement Co. v. McCord
UNITED STATES EX REL. TEXAS PORTLAND CEMENT COMPANY v. McCORD. CERTIFICATE FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT. No. 234. Argued March 6, 1914. Decided April 6, 1914. When the purpose of Congress is stated in such plain t
Boston & Maine Railroad v. Hooker
BOSTON AND MAINE RAILROAD v. HOOKER. ERROR TO THE SUPERIOR COURT OP THE STATE OP MAS- . SACHUSETTS. No. 121. Argued December 10, 11, 1913. Decided April 6, 1914. Congress, by the Hepburn Act and the Carmack amendment in 1906, has regulated
Territory of Arizona ex rel. Gaines v. Copper Queen Consolidated Mining Co.
TERRITORY OF ARIZONA AT THE RELATION OF GAINES, TAX COLLECTOR OF COCHISE COUNTY, v. COPPER QUEEN CONSOLIDATED MINING COMPANY. APPEAL PROM THE SUPREME COURT OP THE TERRITORY OP ARIZONA. No. 89. Argued March 3, 4, 1914. Decided April 6, 1914.
Southern Railway-Carolina Division v. Bennett
SOUTHERN RAILWAY-CAROLINA DIVISION v. BENNETT, ADMINISTRATRIX. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA. No. 796. Argued March 2, 1914. Decided April 6, 1914. Qucere, whether ordinary questions of negligence áre open in thi
Kansas City Southern Railway Co. v. Kaw Valley Drainage District
KANSAS CITY SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY v. KAW VALLEY DRAINAGE DISTRICT. KANSAS CITY TERMINAL RAILWAY COMPANY v. SAME. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OP THE STATE OP KANSAS. Nos. 313, 314. Argued March 19, 20, 1914. Decided April 6, 1914. This cou
Herbert v. Bicknell
HERBERT v. BICKNELL. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OP THE TERRITORY OP HAWAII. No. 269. Submitted March 12, 1914. Decided April 6, 1914. The Hawaiian Supreme Court having held that leaving a copy of the summons at the place where defendant las
Archer v. Greenville Sand & Gravel Co.
ARCHER v. GREENVILLE SAND AND GRAVEL COMPANY. CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OE APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT. No. 271. Argued March 13, 1914. Decided April 6, 1914. Equity has jurisdiction of an action to enjoin a continuing trespass even
Carlesi v. New York
CARLESI v. PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK ERROR TO THE COURT OF GENERAL SESSIONS OF THE PEACE IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF NEW YORK, STATE OF, NEW YORK. No. 679. Argued March 2, 1914. Decided April 6, 1914. In testing .the repugnancy of a stat
Grand Trunk Western Railway Co. v. Lindsay
GRAND TRUNK WESTERN RAILWAY COMPANY v. LINDSAY. ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT. No. 425. Argued February 27, 1914. Decided April 6, 1914. The operation and effect of the Employers’ Liability Act upon the right
Metzger Motor Car Co. v. Parrott
METZGER MOTOR CAR COMPANY v. PARROTT. ERROR TO THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN. No. 309. Argued March 18, 19, 1914. Decided April 6, 1914. Where, since the judgment of the United States District
de Bearn v. Safe Deposit & Trust Co.
de BEARN v. SAFE DEPOSIT AND TRUST COMPANY OF BALTIMORE. APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND. No. 301. Argued March 17, 18, 1914. Decided April 6, 1914. This court takes judicial notice of its ow
Browning v. City of Waycross
BROWNING v. CITY OF WAYCROSS. ERROR TO THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF GEORGIA. No. 259. Argued March 11, 1914. Decided April 6, 1914. A State may not burden, by taxation or otherwise, the taking of orders in one State for goods to be
Miller v. United States
MILLER v. UNITED STATES. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF CLAIMS. No. 178. Argued January 19, 20, 1914. Decided April 6, 1914. The postal contract involved in this action conferred authority on the United States to discontinue its performance and g
Schuyler v. Littlefield
SCHUYLER v. LITTLEFIELD, TRUSTEE OF BROWN & CO. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT. No. 213. Argued January 29, 1914. Decided March 23, 1914. Where one has deposited trust funds in his individual bank account an
Eberle v. Michigan
EBERLE v. PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN. No. 164. Argued January 16, 19, 1914. Decided March 23, 1914. The validity of a local option law adopted after amendments is not affected by the
Santa Fe Central Railway Co. v. Friday
SANTA FE CENTRAL RAILWAY COMPANY v. FRIDAY. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OP THE TERRITORY OP NEW MEXICO. No. 230. Submitted March 5, 1914. Decided March 23, 1914. A statute of a Territory cannot withdraw from the courts established by the Uni
Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway Co. v. West
MISSOURI, KANSAS & TEXAS RAILWAY COMPANY v. WEST. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OP THE STATE OP OKLAHOMA. No. 696. Motion to dismiss or affirm. Submitted January 5, 1914.— Decided March 23, 1914. ■ Whether the injured person was or was not an
Riley v. Massachusetts
RILEY v. COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS. ERROR TO THE SUPERIOR COURT OP THE STATE OP MASSACHUSETTS. No. 228. Argued March 4, 5, 1914. Decided March 23, 1914. A state statute limiting the hours of labor in factories for women, if otherwise va
Stewart v. Michigan
STEWART v. PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OE THE STATE OE MICHIGAN. No. 239. Argued March 6, 1914. Decided March 23, 1914. Crenshaw v. Arkansas, 227 U. S. 389, followed to effect that the negotiation of sales of
In re Grimsinger
No. —, Original. Ex parte: In the Matter of Adolph Grimsinger, Petitioner. Submitted March 9, 1914. Decided March 16, 1914. Mr. George F. Curtis for the petitioner. The Attorney General and The Solicitor General opposing.
W. Schneider Wholesale Wine & Liquor Co. v. Diederich
No. 243. W. Schneider Wholesale Wine & Liquor Company, Appellant, v. August Diederich. Appeal from the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. Argued March 12, 1914. Decided March 16, 1914. Mr. James Love Hopkins and
Grant Bros. Construction Co. v. United States
GRANT BROTHERS CONSTRUCTION CO. v. UNITED STATES. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OP THE TERRITORY OP ARIZONA. No. 182. Argued January 21, 22, 1914. Decided March 16, 1914. Errors allege*! to have been committed by the trial court which do not i
Garland v. Washington
GARLAND v. STATE OF WASHINGTON. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OP THE STATE OP WASHINGTON. No. 226. Submitted January 29, 1914. Decided March 16, 1914. Due process of law does not require the State to adopt any particular form of procedure in c
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.