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
Shepard v. Barkley
SHEPARD ET AL. v. BARKLEY, MODERATOR OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY AND CHAIRMAN OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMISSION OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ET AL. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT Of APPEALS FOR TH
Redpath Lyceum Bureau v. Pickering
No. 987. Redpath Lyceum Bureau, Petitioner, v. John L. Pickering, Collector of Internal Revenue. April 29, 1918. Mr. Albert M. Kales and Mr.' Victor Elting for petitioner. No brief for the United States.
Birge-Forbes Co. v. Heye
No. 950. Birge-Forbes Company, Petitioner, v. Carl R. Heye. April 29, 1918. Mr. Henry 0. Head. for petitioner. Mr. Newton Hance Lassiter for respondent.
Bunch v. Maloney
No. 256. Mrs. Laura L. Bunch, Petitioner, v. J. S. Maloney, as Trustee in Bankruptcy for the T. H. Bunch Commission Company, Bankrupt. On writ of certiorari to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals" for the Eighth Circuit. Argued April
United States ex rel. Louisville Cement Co. v. Interstate Commerce Commission
UNITED STATES EX REL. LOUISVILLE CEMENT COMPANY v. INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION. ERROR TO THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. No. 70. Argued March 14, 1918. Decided April 29, 1918. The provision of § 16 of the Act to Regulat
E. H. Emery & Co. v. American Refrigerator Transit Co.
E. H. EMERY & COMPANY v. AMERICAN REFRIGERATOR TRANSIT COMPANY. APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE SOUTHERN' DISTRICT OF IOWA. No. 739. Argued April 19, 1918. Decided April 29, 1918. In respect of the removability t
Dickinson v. Stiles
DICKINSON, AS RECEIVER OF THE CHICAGO, ROCK ISLAND & PACIFIC RAILWAY COMPANY, v. STILES. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF. THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. No. 735. Argued April 18, 19, 1918. Decided April 29, 1918. There is no inconsistency between th
Ibanez de Aldecoa y Palet v. Hongkong & Shanghai Banking Corp.
JOAQUIN IBANEZ DE ALDECOA Y PALET ET AL. v. HONGKONG & SHANGHAI BANKING CORPORATION. APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS. . No. 231. Argued March 20, 21, 1918. Decided April 29, 1918. Mortgagors, in an action to foreclos
Ibanez de Aldecoa y Palet v. Hongkong & Shanghai Banking Corp.
ZOILO IBANEZ DE ALDECOA Y PALET ET AL. v. HONGKONG & SHANGHAI BANKING CORPORATION ET AL. APPEAL FBOM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS. No. 230. Argued March 20, 21, 1918. Decided April 29, 1918. As to eases existing at the time,
Rederiaktiebolaget Amie v. Universal Transportation Co.
No. 949. Rederiaktiebolaget Amie, Petitioner, v. Universal Transportation Company (Inc.). April 22, 1918. Mr. William, J. Conlen for petitioner. Mr. J. Parker Kir-lin for respondent.
Fairbanks, Morse & Co. v. American Valve & Meter Co.
No. 922. Fairbanks, Morse & Company et al., Petitioners, v. American Valve & Meter Company et al. April 22, 1918. Mr. Fred L. Chappell and Mr. William S. Hodges for petitioners. Mr. Charles M. Cist and Mr. Dwight S. Marfield for respondents
Birdseye v. Woods
No. 650. Clarence F. Birdseye, Appellant, v. Arthur Woods, Police Commissioner of the City of New York; and Kellogg Birdseye, Appellant, v. Arthur Woods, Police Commissioner of the City of New York. No. 651. Appeals from the District Court
Pryor v. Christy
No. 495. Edward B. Pryor and Edward F. Kearney, Receivers of the Wabash Railroad Company, Plaintiffs in Error, v. Laura Christy, Administratrix of the Estate of Edward F. Christy, Deceased. In error to the Kansas City Court of Appeals of th
Saalfield v. United States
SAALFIELD, ADMINISTRATOR OF BROWN, SURVIVING CLAIMANT, ETC., v. UNITED STATES. APPEAL PROM THE COURT OF CLAIMS. No. 101. Argued March 27, 1918. Decided April 22, 1918. Where a contract for the manufacture of guns for the United States provi
Waite v. Macy
WAITE ET AL., AS GENERAL APPRAISERS, DESIGNATED BY THE SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY AS THE BOARD OF TEA APPEALS, v. MACY ET AL., DOING BUSINESS AS COPARTNERS UNDER THE NAME OF CARTER, MACY & COMPANY. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FO
Virginia v. West Virginia
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA v. STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA ET AL. PETITION FOE WRIT OF MANDAMUS. No. 2, Original. Submitted March 6, 1917. Decided April 22, 1918. A suggestion now made for the first time by West Virginia, viz., that that State has
Mississippi Central Railroad v. Lott
No. 296. Mississippi Central Railroad Company, Plaintiff in Error, v. Wade Lott. In error to the Supreme Court of the State of Mississippi. April 15, 1918. Mr. S. E. Travis for plaintiff in error. No appearance for defendant in error.
Harker v. Board of Supervisors of Greene County
No. 923. J. C. Harker, Substituted by Charles O. Harker, Administrator, etc., et al., Petitioners, v. Board of Supervisors of Greene County, Iowa, et al. April 15, 1918. Mr. O. M. Brockett for petitioners. No appearance for respondents.
Shaw v. Lane
No. 899. Franklin Shaw et al., Appellants, v. Franklin K. Lane, Secretary of the Interior. April 15, 1918. Mr. Charles A. Towne and Mr. Duane E. Fox.for"petitioners. Mr. C. Edward Wright, Mr. Charles D. Mahaffie and The Attorney General for
South Coast Steamship Co. v. Rudbach
No. 919. South Coast Steamship Company, Petitioner, v. J. C. Rudbach. April 15, 1918. Mr. Oliver Dibble. for petitioner. No appearance for respondent.
Central of Georgia Railway Co. v. Deloach
No. 254. Central of Georgia Railway Company, Plaintiff in Error, v. Birdie V. Deloach. In error to the Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia. Argued March 28, 1918. Decided April 15, 1918. Mr. T. M. Cunningham, Jr., for plaintiff in erro
United States v. Whited & Wheless, Ltd.
UNITED STATES v. WHITED & WHELESS, LIMITED, ET AL. ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT. No. 204. Submitted March 19, 1918. Decided April 15, 1918. The provision in the Act of March 3, 1891, § 8, á6 Stat. 1099, that “
Thompson v. United States
THOMPSON, ADMINISTRATOR OF THOMPSON, v. UNITED STATES. APPEAL PROM THE COURT OP CLAIMS. No. 184. Argued March 12, 1918. Decided April 15, 1918. Section 162 of the Judicial Code, conferring jurisdiction on the Court of Claims in certain case
Stadelman v. Miner
STADELMAN ET AL. v. MINER ET AL. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OP THE STATE OP OREGON. No. 644. Submitted January 2, 1918. Decided April 15, 1918. Under Jud. Code, § 237, as amended by the Act of September 6,1916, a final judgment of a state 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.