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
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
United States v. Woo Jan
UNITED STATES ET AL. v. WOO JAN. CERTIFICATE from the circuit court of appeals for THE SIXTH CIRCUIT. No. 586. Argued January 17, 1918. Decided January 28, 1918. Section 21 of the Immigration Act of February 20, 1907, c. 1134, 34 Stat. 898,
Martin v. Lankford
MARTIN v. LANKFORD ET AL. ERROR TO THE DISTRICT COURT OP THE UNITED STATES POR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA. No. 97. Submitted December 18, 1917. Decided January 28, 1918. This action was similar to Johnson v. Lankford, ante, 541. Here,
Johnson v. Lankford
JOHNSON v. LANKFORD ET AL. ERROR TO THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA. No. 96. Submitted December 18, 1917. Decided January 28, 1918. An action against the Bank Commissioner of Oklahoma personally
McNaughton v. Stephens
No. 678. Kate P. McNaughton, Appellant, v. W. D. Stephens, Governor of the State of California, et al. Appeal , from the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of California. Submitted January 16, 1918. Decided Januar
Porto Rico v. Tapia
No. 534. People of Porto Rico et al., Appellants, v. Carlos Tapia. Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the District of Porto Rico. Argued January 17, 18, 1918. Decided January 21, 1918. Mr. Edward S. Bailey, Mr. Samuel T
Railroad Commission v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co.
No. 391. Railroad Commission of the State of California, Plaintiff in Error, v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Company. In error to the Supreme Court of the State of California. Argued January 18, 1918. Decided January 21, 1918. Mr. Do
Union Pacific Railroad v. Huxoll
UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY v. HUXOLL, ADMINISTRATRIX OF HUXOLL. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OP THE STATE OP NEBRASKA. No. 104. Argued December 21, 1917. Decided January 21, 1918. The question, whether any substantial evidence was introdu
Southern Pacific Co. v. Darnell-Taenzer Lumber Co.
SOUTHERN PACIFIC COMPANY ET AL. v. DARNELL-TAENZER LUMBER COMPANY ET AL. ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT. No. 132. Argued January 8, 9, 1918. Decided January 21, 1918. The fact that one who paid unreasonable frei
Bates v. Bodie
BATES v. BODIE. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OP THE STATE OP NEBRASKA. No. 120. Argued January 4, 1918. Decided January 21, 1918. When a case is here upon the ground that the court below denied full faith and credit to a decree of a court of
Brightman v. Lake Erie & Western Railroad
No. 125. Archibald E. Brightman, Plaintiff in Error, v. Lake Erie & Western Railroad Company. In error to the District Court of the United States for the District of Indiana. Argued January 7, 1918. Decided January 14, 1918. Mr. William V.
Martin v. Commercial National Bank
MARTIN, TRUSTEE IN BANKRUPTCY OF VIRGIN, v. COMMERCIAL NATIONAL BANK OF MACON, GEORGIA. CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT’COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT. No. 100. Argued December 19, 20, 1917. Decided January 14, 1918. When the staté law re
Ketcham v. Burr
KETCHAM v. BURR ET AL. APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN. No. 114. Submitted January 2, 1918. Decided January 14, 1918. Appellant, having been for a time confined in an asylum as an ins
Illinois Central Railroad v. State Public Utilities Commission
ILLINOIS CENTRAL RAILROAD COMPANY v. STATE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF ILLINOIS ET AL. STATE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF ILLINOIS ET AL. v. UNITED STATES ET AL. APPEALS PROM THE DISTRICT COURT OP THE UNITED STATES POR THE NORTHERN DIS
George A. Fuller Co. v. Otis Elevator Co.
GEORGE A. FULLER COMPANY v. OTIS ELEVATOR COMPANY. CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. No. 128. Argued January 3, 1918. Decided January 14, 1918. Petitioner, having paid the judgment affirmed in George A. Fuller
Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway Co. v. Texas
MISSOURI, KANSAS & TEXAS RAILWAY COMPANY OF TEXAS ET AL. v. STATE OF TEXAS. ERROR TO THE COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS, THIRD SUPREME JUDICIAL DISTRICT, OP THE STATE OP TEXAS. No. 113. Submitted January 2, 1918. Decided January 14, 1918. Where, in
Ruthenberg v. United States
RUTHENBERG ET AL. v. UNITED STATES. ERROR TO THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO. No. 656. Argued December 13, 14, 1917. Decided January 14, 1918. As to the constitutionality of the Selective Draft Law,
Kramer v. United States
KRAMER ET AL. v. UNITED STATES. error to the district court of the united states FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK. No. 680. Argued December 13, 14, 1917. Decided January 14, 1918. After an examination of the entire record, the court fi
Goldman v. United States
GOLDMAN ET AL. v. UNITED STATES. ERROR TO THE DISTRICT COURT OF. THE UNITED STATES FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK. No. 702. Argued December 13, 14, 1917. Decided January 14, 1918. The Selective Draft Law of May 18, 1917, upheld as co
Stadelman v. Miner
No. 644. Minnie Evvia Stadelman et al., Plaintiffs in Error, v. W. H. Miner et al. In error to the Supreme Court of the State of Oregon. Submitted January 2, 1918. Decided January 7, 1918. Mr. John M. Gearin for plaintiffs in error. Mr. Guy
Gulf, Colorado & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. Vasbinder
No. 112. Gulf, Colorado & Santa Fe Railway Company, Plaintiff in Error, v. W. E. Vasbinder. In error to the Court of Civil Appeals, Fourth Supreme Judicial District, State of Texas. Argued January 2, 1918. Decided January 7, 1918. Mr. Alexa
Rosen v. United States
ROSEN ET AL. v. UNITED STATES. PAKAS v. UNITED STATES. CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OP APPEALS POR THE SECOND CIRCUIT. Nos. 365, 438. Argued December 12, 1917. Decided January 7, 1918. Under the modern rule, supported both by legislation
Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. United States
LOUISVILLE & NASHVILLE RAILROAD COMPANY v. UNITED STATES ET AL. APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY. No. 91. Submitted November 23, 1917. Decided January 7, 1918. The appellant applied to
City of Cincinnati v. Cincinnati & Hamilton Traction Co.
CITY OF CINCINNATI v. CINCINNATI & HAMILTON TRACTION COMPANY ET AL. APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE-SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO. No. 10. Argued January 24, 25, 1916; restored to docket for reargument June 12, 1916;
Boldt v. Pennsylvania Railroad
BOLDT, ADMINISTRATRIX OF BOLDT, v. PENNSYLVANIA RAILROAD COMPANY. ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OP APPEALS POR THE SECOND CIRCUIT. No. 62. Argued Novémber 16, 19, 1917. Decided January 7, 1918. Under the Federal Employers’ Liability Act, excep
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.