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
1923 Cases
351 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
City of Newark v. New Jersey
CITY OF NEWARK v. STATE OF NEW JERSEY. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OP THE STATE OP NEW JERSEY. No. 469. Argued March 2, 1923. Decided May 7, 1923. 1. The Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment cannot be invoked by a city against
City of Trenton v. New Jersey
CITY OF TRENTON v. STATE OF NEW JERSEY. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY. No. 430. Argued March 2, 1923. Decided May 7, 1923. 1. A State has power, and it is its duty, to control and conserve its water resources for the
Oliver Iron Mining Co. v. Lord
OLIVER IRON MINING COMPANY v. LORD ET AL. CLEVELAND-CLIFFS IRON COMPANY v. LORD ET AL. MESABA-CLIFFS IRON MINING COMPANY v. LORD ET AL. BENNETT MINING COMPANY ET AL. v. LORD ET AL. REPUBLIC IRON & STEEL COMPANY ET AL. v. LORD ET AL. BIWABIK
Bianchi v. Morales
BIANCHI ET AL. v. MORALES ET AL. APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR PORTO RICO. No. 934. Motion to affirm or advance, and to vacate stay, submitted April 16, 1923. Decided May 7, 1923. 1. The court may affirm a decree d
United States v. Sischo
UNITED STATES v. SISCHO. CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT. No. 76. Reargued April 23, 1923. Decided May 7, 1923. 1. The purpose of requiring a ship’s manifest is not merely the collection of duties but also t
Magnum Import Co. v. Coty
MAGNUM IMPORT COMPANY, INC., v. COTY. COHN, TRADING AS MACLEN IMPORT COMPANY, v. COTY. BAUM ET AL., TRADING AS BEAUTEX COMPANY, v. COTY. IVORY NOVELTIES TRADING COMPANY, INC., v. COTY. MAGNUM IMPORT COMPANY, INC., v. HOUBIGANT, INC. PETITIO
Essgee Co. of China v. United States
ESSGEE COMPANY OF CHINA ET AL. v. UNITED STATES. HANCLAIRE TRADING CORPORATION ET AL. v. UNITED STATES. ERROR TO AND APPEAL PROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK. Nos. 706 and 707. Submitted Apri
Dier v. Banton
DIER ET AL., INDIVIDUALLY AND AS COPARTNERS UNDER THE FIRM NAME OF E. D. DIER & COMPANY, ET AL., v. BANTON, DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF NEW YORK, ET AL. APPEAL PROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF
Collins v. Loisel
No. 880. Charles Glen Collins v. Victor Loisel, United States Marshal for the Eastern District of Louisiana. Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Louisiana. Argued May 4,1923. Decided May 4, 1923.
Palmer v. Indiana
No. 375. Harry Palmer v. State of Indiana. Error to the Supreme Court of the State of Indiana. May 2, 1923. Mr. Henry Adamson for plaintiff in error. No appearance for defendant in error.
Windsor v. United States
No. 922. Ike Windsor v. United States. April 30, 1923. Mr. WiU Ham Gordon for petitioner. No brief filed for the United States.
Agnello v. United States
No. 1003. Thomas Agnello et al. v. United States. April 30,1923. Mr. George Gordon Battle for petitioners. Mr. Solicitor General Beck for the United States.
Yuma County Water Users' Ass'n v. Schlecht
YUMA COUNTY WATER USERS’ ASSOCIATION ET AL. v. SCHLECHT ET AL. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT. No. 268. Argued February 28, 1923. Decided April 30, 1923. 1. Preliminary, tentative opinions of the cost of cons
Cullinan v. Walker
CULLINAN v. WALKER, AS COLLECTOR OF INTERNAL REVENUE FOR THE FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS. ERROR TO THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS. No. 301. Argued March 9, 1923. Decided April 30, 1923. 1. The gain ac
Cunard Steamship Co. v. Mellon
CUNARD STEAMSHIP COMPANY, LTD., ET AL. v. MELLON, SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY, ET AL. OCEANIC STEAM NAVIGATION COMPANY, LTD., v. MELLON, SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY, ET AL. INTERNATIONAL NAVIGATION COMPANY, LTD., v. MELLON, SECRETARY OF THE TRE
People ex rel. Clyde v. Gilchrist
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK EX REL. CLYDE v. GILCHRIST, PRESIDENT, ET AL., AS MEMBERS OF THE STATE TAX COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK. ERROB TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK. No. 318. Argued April 17, 1923. Decided Apr
Ex parte Fuller
EX PARTE: IN THE MATTER OF FULLER ET AL., INDIVIDUALLY AND AS COPARTNERS UNDER THE NAME OF E. M. FULLER & COMPANY, PETITIONERS. APPLICATION FOR A STAY OF ORDERS OF DISTRICT COURT PENDING APPEAL. No. — Motion for sta^ submitted April 27, 192
MacKelvie v. Mutual Benefit Life Insurance
No. 971. Jeanette L. MacKelvie v. Mutual Benefit Life Insurance Company of Newark, New Jersey. April 23, 1923. Mr. William Wallace, Jr., for petitioner. Mr. Charles E. Hughes, Jr., for respondent.
McNulty ex rel. McNulty v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co.
No. 930. Le Verra M. McNulty, by C. N. McNulty, her next friend, v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Company. April 23, 1923. Mr. Henry E. Lutz for petitioner. Mr. Frank A. Kemp, Jr., and Mr. Gardiner Lathrop for respondent.
Davis v. Hareford
No. 896. James C. Davis, as Agent, etc. v. Charles Hareford. Error to the Supreme Court of the State of Arkansas. April 23, 1923. Mr. A. W. Smith, Mr. Vincent M. Miles, Mr. Thomas B. Pryor and Mr. A. A. McLaughlin, for plaintiff in error, i
Weiss v. White
No. 936. Harry H. Weiss, Collector of Internal Revenue, v. John G. White. April 23, 1923. Mr. Solicitor General Beck, Mrs. Mabel Walker Willebrandt, Assistant Attorney General, and Mr. John C. Hayes for petitioner. Mr. John G. White, Mr. A.
Lion Bonding & Surety Co. v. Karatz
LION BONDING & SURETY COMPANY v. KARATZ. DEPARTMENT OF TRADE & COMMERCE OF THE STATE OF NEBRASKA ET AL. v. HERTZ ET AL., AS RECEIVERS OF LION BONDING & SURETY COMPANY. CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT. Nos.
St. Louis Southwestern Railway Co. v. United States
ST. LOUIS SOUTHWESTERN RAILWAY COMPANY v. UNITED STATES. APPEAL PROM THE COURT OP CLAIMS. No. 184. Argued March 6, 7, 1923. Decided April 23, 1923. 1. Under the Act of March 4, 1913, c. 143, 37 Stat. 797, authorizing the Postmaster General
A. G. Spalding & Bros. v. Edwards
A. G. SPALDING & BROS. v. EDWARDS, COLLECTOR OF INTERNAL REVENUE FOR THE SECOND DISTRICT OF NEW YORK. ERROR TO THE DISTRICT COURT OP THE UNITED STATES FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OP NEW YORK. No. 710. Argued April 10, 11, 1923. Decided April
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.