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
1918 Cases
299 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
Puget Sound Traction, Light & Power Co. v. Newell
No. 148. Puget Sound Traction, Light & Power Company et al., Plaintiffs in Error, v. Fred W. Newell et al., Commissioners, etc. In error to the Supreme Court of the State of Washington. Argued January 23, 24, 1918. Decided March 4, 1918. Mr
Steamship Bowdoin Co. v. Industrial Accident Commission of California
No. 476. Steamship Bowdoin Company, Plaintiff in Error, v. Industrial Accident Commission of the State of California et al. In error to the Supreme Court of the State of California. Argued January 21, 1918. Decided March 4, 1918. Mr. Edward
Glasgow Navigation Co. v. Munson Steamship Line
No. 489. Glasgow Navigation Company, Ltd., Appellant, v. Munson Steamship Line. Appeal from the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. Motion to dismiss or affirm submitted February 4, 1918. Decided March 4, 1918. Mr
Northern Pacific Railway Co. v. Wismer
NORTHERN PACIFIC RAILWAY COMPANY v. WISMER, SUBSTITUTED FOR WISMER. 3RROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH. CIRCUIT. No. 152. Argued January 28, 29, 1918. Decided March 4, 1918. Lands opposite the line of the Northern Pacific R
Great Northern Railway Co. v. Alexander
GREAT NORTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY v. ALEXANDER, ADMINISTRATOR OF HALL. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OE THE STATE OP MONTANA. No. 130. Argued January 15, 1918. Decided March 4, 1918. A case arising under the Federal Employers’ Liability Act betwe
Andrews v. John Nix & Co.
ANDREWS, EXECUTRIX OF ANDREWS, v. JOHN NIX & COMPANY. ANDREWS, EXECUTRIX OF ANDREWS, v. HENDRICKSON. ERROR TO THE COURT OF ERRORS AND APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY. Nos. 140, 141. Argued January 22, 1918. Decided March 4, 1918. Credito
McCurdy v. United States
McCURDY, COUNTY TREASURER OF OSAGE COUNTY, OKLAHOMA, ET AL. v. UNITED STATES. APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA. No. 685. Argued January 18, 1918. Decided March 4, 1918. Whether, in vie
Brogan v. National Surety Co.
BROGAN v. NATIONAL SURETY COMPANY. ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OP APPEALS POR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT. No. 171. Argued January 30, 31, 1918. Decided March 4, 1918. The Act of August 13,1894, c. 280, 28 Stat. 278, and the bonds given under it, must
Bilby v. Stewart
BILBY ET AL. v. STEWART ET AL. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA. No. 160. Submitted January 25, 1918. Decided March 4, 1918. The court may not review a judgment of a state supreme court resting on a non-federal ground ade
Nelson v. Southern Railway Co.
NELSON v. SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY. EEEOE TO THE SUPEEME COUET OP THE STATE OP NOETH CAROLINA. No. 129. Argued January 8, 1918. Decided March 4, 1918. A civil engineer, employed by a railroad company, while surveying within one of its yards
Sears v. City of Akron
SEARS, TRUSTEE, v. CITY OF AKRON. APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO. No. 105. Argued January 21, 22, 1918. Decided March 4, 1918. Mere incorporation and organization under the general laws
Board of Trade of Chicago v. United States
BOARD OF TRADE OF THE CITY OF CHICAGO ET AL. v. UNITED STATES. APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS. No. 98. Argued December 18, 19, 1917. Decided March 4, 1918. The “Call” rule of the Bo
Egan v. McDonald
EGAN v. McDONALD. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF SOUTH DAKOTA. No. 88. Submitted January 28, 1918. Decided March 4, 1918. Under § 7 of the Act of May 27, 1902, c. 888, 32 Stat. 275, an Indian allotment held under trust patent an
United States v. Bathgate
UNITED STATES v. BATHGATE ET AL. UNITED STATES v. BURCKHAUSER ET AL. UNITED STATES v. COONS ET AL. UNITED STATES v. FARRELL ET AL. UNITED STATES v. KLAYER ET AL. UNITED STATES v. URICHO ET AL. ERROR TO THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATE
Lane v. Morrison
LANE, SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR, ET AL. v. MORRISON, FOR AND ON BEHALF OF HIMSELF AND ALL OTHER MEMBERS OF THE CHIPPEWA TRIBE OF INDIANS IN MINNESOTA SIMILARLY SITUATED. APPEAL PROM THE COURT OP APPEALS OP THE DISTRICT OP COLUMBIA. No. 169.
Denee v. Ankeny
DENEE v. ANKENY, EXECUTRIX OF RIDPATH. GUNNING ET AL. v. MORRISON ET AL. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OP THE STATE OP WASHINGTON. Nos. 147, 440. Argued January 23, 1918. Decided March 4, 1918. An attempt to establish settlement by stealth and
Sutton v. English
SUTTON ET AL. v. ENGLISH ET AL. APPEAL PROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS. No. 330. Argued April 10, 1917. Decided March 4, 1918. In a suit in the District Court to set aside testamentary disposit
City & County of Denver v. Denver Union Water Co.
CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER ET AL. v. DENVER UNION WATER COMPANY. DENVER UNION WATER COMPANY v. CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER ET AL. APPEALS FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO. Nos. 294, 295. Argued October
Arkansas v. Tennessee
STATE OF ARKANSAS v. STATE OF TENNESSEE. IN EQUITY. No. 4, Original. Argued October 9, 1917. Decided. March 4, 1918. When two States of the Union are separated by a navigable stream, their boundary being described as'“a line drawn along the
Cheney Bros. v. Massachusetts
CHENEY BROTHERS COMPANY ET AL. v. COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS. ERROR TO THE SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT OF THE STATE OF MASSACHUSETTS. ■ No. 12. Argued April 20, 1916; restored to docket for reargument May 21, 1917; reargued October 19, 1917.
Locomobile Co. of America v. Massachusetts
LOCOMOBILE COMPANY OF AMERICA v. COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS. ERROR TO THE SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT OP THE STATE OP MASSACHUSETTS. No. 734. Argued October 19, 1917. Decided March 4, 1918. An excise tax of a designated per cent, of entire au
International Paper Co. v. Massachusetts
INTERNATIONAL PAPER COMPANY v. COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS. ERROR TO THE SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT OF THE STATE OF MASSACHUSETTS. No. 733. Argued October 19, 1917. Decided March 4, 1918. The principles laid down in Western Union Telegraph Co
Ex parte Slater
EX PARTE SLATER, PUBLIC ADMINISTRATOR, ETC., PETITIONER. PETITION FOB WEIT OF MANDAMUS. No. 27, Original. Argued January 21, 1918. Rule discharged March 4, 1918. A petition for mandamus should give a correct, uncolored statement 'of the mat
Great Northern Railway Co. v. Donaldson
GREAT NORTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY v. DONALDSON, ADMINISTRATRIX OF THOMS. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON. No. 172. Argued January 31, 1918. Decided March 4, 1918. Where the state trial and supreme courts have successively
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.