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
Barnes v. People
No. 36. Claude E. Barnes v. People of the State of New York. Error to the County Court of Jefferson County, State of New York. Argued October 7, 1924. Decided October 13, 1924. Mr. Nathaniel F. Breen, with whom Mr. John B. Rogers was on the
Stickel v. Big Laurel Coal Co.
No. 218. W. L. Stickel v. Big Laurel Coal Company. Error to the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of West Virginia. Motion to dismiss or affirm submitted October 6, 1924. Decided October 13, 1924. Mr. Harold A. R
United States v. State
No. 14. Original. United States v. State of Washington. In Equity. Stipulation as to decrees submitted October 6, 1924. Decided October 13, 1924. Mr. Solicitor General Beck for the United States. Mr. L. L. Thompson for defendant.
Terminal Railroad Ass'n v. United States
TERMINAL RAILROAD ASSOCIATION OF ST. LOUIS ET AL. v. UNITED STATES ET AL. APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI. No. 115. Argued March 3, 4, 1924. Decided October 13, 1924. 1. Certain railw
Ziang Sung Wan v. United States
ZIANG SUNG WAN v. UNITED STATES. CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. No. 127. Argued April 7, 8, 1924. Decided October 13, 1924. 1. A bill of exceptions in the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia, held prop
Irving National Bank v. Blake
No. 1062. Irving National Bank, etc. v. Thomas M. Blake et al., Receivers, etc. June 9, 1924. Mr. Irving L. Ernst for petitioner. Mr. Herman Aaron for respondents.
American Central Insurance v. Sims
No. 1034. American Central Insurance Company v. Mrs. G. W. Sims. June 9, 1924. Mr. R. Lee Bartels for petitioner. No appearance for respondent.
Lewis v. United States
No. 1000. Samuel S. Lewis et al. v. United States. June 9, 1924. Mr. Harvey H. Pratt for petitioners. No brief filed for the United States.
Laughlin v. Burry Railway Supply Co.
No. 1024. Elmyr A. Laughlin et al. v. Burry Railway Supply Company et al. June 9, 1924. Mr. Joshua R. H. Potts and Mr. Brayton G. Richards for petitioners. Mr. George L. Wilkinson for respondents.
Baltimore & Ohio Railroad v. Gill
No. 974. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Company v. Anna W. Gill, Administratrix, etc. June 9, 1924. Mr. Ralph J. Kramer, Mr. Edward C. Kramer, Mr. Bruce A. Campbell, Mr. Walter R. Mayne, Mr. Morison R. Waite and Mr. William A. Eggers for petitio
Childs v. United States
No. 992. Edward H. Childs, Trustee in Bankruptcy, v. United States. Petition for a writ of certiorari to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. June 9, 1924. Mr. Moses Cohen for petitioner. Mr. Solicitor General Beck and Mr. A
Minneapolis, St. Paul & Sault Ste. Marie Railway Co. v. Goneau
No. 1063. Minneapolis, St. Paul & Sault Ste. Marie Railway Company v. Ernest J. Goneau. June 9, 1924. Mr. Marshall A. Spooner and Mr. John E. Palmer for petitioner. Mr. Samuel A. Anderson for respondent.
Clemmer v. Ross
No. 1017. R. H. Clemmer, Attorney in fact, etc., et al., v. Arthur L. Ross et al. June 9, 1924. Mr. H. H. Bumble for petitioners. Mr. R. Randolph Hicks and Mr. Arthur Leonard Ross for respondents.
Great International Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers v. Green
No. 738. Great International Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers v. J. W. Green. Error to the Supreme Court of the State of Alabama. Motion to dismiss or affirm submitted June 2, 1924. Decided June 9, 1924. Mr. J. T. Stokely, for defendant
James Everard's Breweries v. Day
JAMES EVERARD’S BREWERIES v. DAY, PROHIBITION DIRECTOR OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, ET AL. EDWARD AND JOHN BURKE, LIMITED, v. BLAIR, COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, ET AL. APPEALS PROM THE DISTRICT COURT OP THE UNITED STATES FOR THE SOUTHERN
United States & Interstate Commerce Commission v. New River Co.
UNITED STATES AND INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION v. NEW RIVER COMPANY ET AL. SLAB FORK COAL COMPANY ET AL. v. NEW RIVER COMPANY ET AL. APPEALS PROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA, Nos. 627
William R. Warner & Co. v. Eli Lilly & Co.
WILLIAM R. WARNER & COMPANY v. ELI LILLY & COMPANY. CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT. No. 32. Argued April 28, 29, 1924. Decided June 9, 1924. 1. Names which are merely descriptive of the ingredients, qualiti
Idaho Irrigation Co. v. Gooding
IDAHO IRRIGATION COMPANY, LTD., ET AL. v. GOODING ET AL. GOODING ET AL. v. IDAHO IRRIGATION COMPANY, LTD., ET AL. APPEALS PROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OP APPEALS POR THE NINTH CIRCUIT. Nos. 324 and 336. Argued April 11, 14, 1924. Decided June 9,
Oklahoma v. Texas
STATE OF OKLAHOMA v. STATE OF TEXAS. UNITED STATES, INTERVENER. IN EQUITY. No. 15, Original. Orders entered June 9, 1924. Orders: 1. Granting Texas leave to file an amended counterclaim and •fixing time for answer. 2. That, an injunction is
Oklahoma v. Texas
STATE OF OKLAHOMA v. STATE OF TEXAS. UNITED STATES, INTERVENER. IN' EQUITY. No. 15, Original. Order fixing time for filing suggestions, etc., entered May 5, 1924; argued on suggestions, etc., May 26, 1924. Decided June 9, 1924. 1. Where a r
Oklahoma v. Texas
STATE OF OKLAHOMA v. STATE OF TEXAS. UNITED STATES, INTERVENER. IN EQUITY. No. 15, Original. DECREE RELATING TO STATE BOUNDARY, ENTERED JUNE 9, 1924. Decree: (1) reciting the report of the commissioners heretofore appointed showing that the
Oklahoma v. Texas
STATE OF OKLAHOMA v. STATE OF TEXAS. UNITED STATES, INTERVENER. IN EQUITY. No. 15, Original. Order that reports by commissioners respecting running of boundary line, etc., be filed, and limiting time for objections or exceptions, entered Ap
Oklahoma v. Texas
STATE OF OKLAHOMA v. STATE OF TEXAS. UNITED STATES, INTERVENER. IN EQUITY. No. 15, Original. Rule to show cause issued May 5, 1924; response to rule filed May 26, 1924. Decided June 9, 1924. 1. A claim for reimbursement from funds held by t
Walton v. House of Representatives of Oklahoma
WALTON v. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA ET AL. APPEAL PROM THE DISTRICT COURT OP THE UNITED STATES FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OP OKLAHOMA. No. 689. Submitted April 11, 1924. Decided June 9, 1924. A court of the United Stat
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.