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
1924 Cases
322 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 ex rel. Mensevich v. Tod
UNITED STATES EX REL. MENSEVICH v. TOD, COMMISSIONER OF IMMIGRATION AT THE PORT OF NEW YORK. APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF. NEW YORK. No. 148. Argued January 2, 1924. Decided February 18, 1
United States ex rel. Tisi v. Tod
UNITED STATES EX REL. TISI, ALIAS CORTINA, v. TOD, COMMISSIONER OF IMMIGRATION AT THE PORT OF NEW YORK. APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK. No. 132. Argued January 3, 1924. Decided Febr
Red Cross Line v. Atlantic Fruit Co.
RED CROSS LINE v. ATLANTIC FRUIT COMPANY. CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OP THE STATE OP NEW YORK. No. 112. Argued November 14, 15, 1923. Decided February 18, 1924. 1. A decision of the highest court of a State excluding maritime contracts
Ex parte Transportes Maritimos Do Estado
EX PARTE: IN THE MATTER OF TRANSPORTES MARITIMOS DO ESTADO, ETC., PETITIONER. PETITION FOR WRIT OP PROHIBITION AND/OR MANDAMUS. No. 26, Original. Argued January 7, 8, 1924. Decided February 18, 1924. 1. Upon the libel of a ship, for service
Myers v. United States
MYERS ET AL. v. UNITED STATES. ERROR TO THE DISTRICT COURT OE THE UNITED STATES EOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI. No. 158. Submitted January 11, 1924. Decided February 18, 1924. 1. The power to punish contempt to enforce obedience inher
The "Gul Djemal"
THE “GUL DJEMAL.” APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK. No. 83. Argued January 4, 1924. Decided February 18, 1924. The objection that a vessel, owned, possessed, manned, and operated by a
Railroad Commission of Texas v. Eastern Texas Railroad
RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS ET AL. v. EASTERN TEXAS RAILROAD COMPANY ET AL. STATE OF TEXAS v. EASTERN TEXAS RAILROAD COMPANY ET AL. APPEALS PROM THE DISTRICT COURT OP THE UNITED STATES POR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS. Nos. 145 and 146. A
United States ex rel. St. Louis Southwestern Railway Co. v. Interstate Commerce Commission
UNITED STATES AT THE RELATION OF ST. LOUIS SOUTHWESTERN RAILWAY COMPANY v. INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION ET AL. ERROR TO THE COURT OF APPEALS OP THE DISTRICT OP COLUMBIA. No. 398. Argued January 23, 24, 1924. Decided February 18, 1924. 1.
Edwards v. Slocum
EDWARDS, FORMERLY COLLECTOR OF INTERNAL REVENUE FOR THE SECOND DISTRICT OF NEW YORK, v. SLOCUM ET AL. CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OP APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT. No. 276. Argued January 10, 1924. Decided February 18, 1924. In assessi
Standard Parts Co. v. Peck
STANDARD PARTS COMPANY v. PECK. CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT. No. 160. Argued January 15, 1924. Decided February 18, 1924. One who is employed and paid by another to develop a process and machinery for ma
Young Men's Christian Ass'n v. Davis
YOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF COLUMBUS, OHIO, ET AL. v. DAVIS ET AL. CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OP THE STATE OP OHIO. No. 249. Argued January 11, 1924. Decided February 18, 1924. 1. The Estate Tax imposed by the Revenue Act of 1
Mahler v. Eby
MAHLER ET AL. v. EBY, INSPECTOR IN CHARGE IMMIGRATION SERVICE, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, AT CHICAGO, ILLINOIS. APPEAL PROM THE DISTRICT COURT OP THE UNITED STATES POR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS. No. 184. Argued January 24, 25, 1924.
Fleming v. Fleming
FLEMING ET AL. v. FLEMING. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF IOWA. No. 175. Argued January 17, 1924. Decided February 18, 1924. 1. An objection to a decision of a State Supreme Court that it impaired contract rights, in violation o
Puget Sound Power & Light Co. v. County of King
PUGET SOUND POWER & LIGHT COMPANY ET AL. v. COUNTY OF KING ET AL. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON. No. 138. Motion to dismiss or affirm submitted January 2, 1924. Decided February 18, 1924. 1. The time allowed, by the
Barnett v. Kunkel
BARNETT ET AL. v. KUNKEL ET AL. APPEAL PROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT. No. 134. Argued January 4, 1924. Decided February 18, 1924. 1. The Court of its own motion will dismiss an appeal not within its jurisdiction.
Board of Trade v. Johnson
BOARD OF TRADE OF THE CITY OF CHICAGO ET AL. v. JOHNSON, TRUSTEE IN BANKRUPTCY OF HENDERSON. CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OE APPEALS EOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT. No. 90. Argued November 26, 1923. Decided February 18, 1924. 1. Decisions of st
Pyrene Manufacturing Co. v. Boyce
No. 723. Pyrene Manufacturing Company v. Harrison H. Boyce et al. January 28, 1924. Mr. F. P. Warfield for petitioner. Mr. Charles Neave, Mr. Joseph H. Milans and Mr. Edmund Quincy Moses for respondents.
Industrial Accident Commission of California v. Alaska Packers Ass'n
No. 682. Industrial Accident Commission of the State of California et al. v. Alaska Packers Association. January 28, 1924. Mr. Warren H. Pillsbury for petitioners: No appearance for respondent.
First National Bank in St. Louis v. Missouri
FIRST NATIONAL BANK IN ST. LOUIS v. STATE OF MISSOURI AT THE INFORMATION OF BARRETT, ATTORNEY GENERAL. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSOURI. No. 252. Argued May 7, 1923; restored to docket for reargument May 21, 1923; reargue
Washington-Southern Navigation Co. v. Baltimore & Philadelphia Steamboat Co.
WASHINGTON-SOUTHERN NAVIGATION COMPANY v. BALTIMORE & PHILADELPHIA STEAMBOAT COMPANY. ON CERTIFICATE FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT. No. 108. Argued November 27, 28, 1923. Decided January 28, 1924. 1. The function o
Electric Boat Co. v. United States
ELECTRIC BOAT COMPANY v. UNITED STATES. APPEAL FKOM THE, COURT OP CLAIMS. No. 159. Argued January 11, 14, 1924. Decided January 28, 1924. Where the United States, without disclosure to it of the scope of an application for patent, obtained
United States v. New York Coffee & Sugar Exchange, Inc.
UNITED STATES v. NEW YORK COFFEE AND SUGAR EXCHANGE, INC., ET AL. APPEAL PROM THE' DISTRICT COURT OP THE UNITED STATES FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OP NEW YORK. No. 331. Argued November 16, 1923. Decided January 28, 1924. 1. Sales of a commodi
Heidner v. St. Paul & Tacoma Lumber Co.
No. 613. Hans Heidner et al. v. St. Paul & Tacoma Lumber Company. January 21, 1924. Mr. Guy E. Kelley for petitioners. Mr. J. T. S. Lyle for respondent.
United States v. Ransom
No. 178. United States v. J. P. Ransom. Error to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. Argued January 18, 1924. Decided January 21, 1924. Mr. S. W. Williams, Special Assistant to the Attorney General, with whom Mr. Solicitor
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.