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
1926 Cases
356 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
Todd v. United States
No. 866. James F. Todd v. United States. February 1, 1926. Mr. Moses Cohen for petitioner. Solicitor General Mitchell, Assistant Attorney General Luhring, and Mr. Harry S. Ridgely for the United States.
Millers' Indemnity Underwriters v. Braud
MILLERS’ INDEMNITY UNDERWRITERS v. NELLIE BOUDREAUX BRAUD AND ED. J. BRAUD. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF TEXAS. No. 124. Argued January 13, 1926. Decided February 1, 1926. Plaintiff's intestate, while employed as a diver by a
United States v. Holt State Bank
UNITED STATES v. HOLT STATE BANK et al. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT. No. 47. Argued April 24, 27, 1925. Decided February 1, 1926. 1. In general, lands underlying navigable waters within a State belong to
Cole v. Norborne Land Drainage District
CHARLES D. COLE, MARY COLE, HERMAN NOELKER et al. v. NORBORNE LAND DRAINAGE DISTRICT OF CARROLL COUNTY, MISSOURI, H. H. FRANKLIN, L. WILLIAMS et al. APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI. •
Maryland v. Soper
MARYLAND v. SOPER, JUDGE. (No. 3) PETITION POR A WRIT OF MANDAMUS No. 25, Original. Argued December 7, 1925. Decided February 1, 1926. Decided upon the authority of Maryland v. Soper (No. £), ante, p. 36. Messrs. Thos. H. Robinson, Attorney
Maryland v. Soper
MARYLAND v. SOPER, JUDGE. (No. 2) PETITION EOR A WRIT OF MANDAMUS. No. 24 Original. Argued December 7 1925. Decided February 1, 1926. An indictment in a state court charging federal prohibition agents with a conspiracy to obstruct justice b
Maryland v. Soper
MARYLAND v. SOPER, JUDGE. (No. 1) PETITION POR A WRIT OP MANDAMUS. No. 23, Original. Argued December 7, 1925. Decided February 1, 1926. 1. The remedy of mandamus is grantable by this Court, in its sound, discretion, on petition of a State t
Mazukiewicz v. Hanover National Bank
No. 858. John Mazukiewicz v. Hanover National Bank of the City of New York. January 25, 1926. Mr. Charles A. Frue-ouff for petitioner. Mr. Percy S. Dudley for respondent.
Shaw v. Work
No. 852. Alexander C. Shaw, Attorney in fact for N. R. Waterman, v. Hubert Work, Secretary of the Interior. January 25, 1926. Mr. F. W. Clements for petitioner. Solicitor General Mitchell .and Assistant Attorney General Par-menter, for resp
Burke v. Monumental Division No. 52
No. 161. D. J. Burke v. Monumental Division No. 52, Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers et al. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. Argued January 21, 1926. Decided January 25, 1926. Mr. Cyrus G. Derr, with whom
National Contracting Co. v. United States
No. 160. National Contracting Company v. United States. Appeal from the Court of Claims. Argued January 21, 1926. Decided January 25, 1926. Mr. Raymond M. Hudson for appellant. Solicitor General Mitchell and Assistant Attorney General Gallo
Marsino v. United States
No. 143. Joseph B. Marsino v. United States and James Higgins. Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the District of Massachusetts. Argued January 18, 1926. Decided January 25, 1926. Messrs. Asa P. French and Leo A. Rogers
Chicago & Eastern Illinois Railway Co. v. Chicago Heights Terminal Transfer Railroad
No. 574. Chicago and Eastern Illinois Railway Company, v. Chicago Heights Terminal Transfer Railroad Company. Error to the Supreme Court of the State of Illinois. Motion to dismiss or affirm submitted January 18, 1926. Decided January 25, 1
Mandelbaum v. United States
MANDELBAUM v. UNITED STATES. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT. No. 139. Argued January 15, 1926. Decided January 25, 1926. Unregistered War Savings Certificates, issued under the Acts of September 24, 1917, an
H. E. Crook Co. v. United States
H. E. CROOK COMPANY, INC. v. UNITED STATES. APPEAL PROM THE COURT OF CLAIMS. No. 122. Argued January 12, 1926. Decided January 25, 1926. Where a contract for furnishing and installing heating plants in braidings to be erected for the Govern
Hughes v. Georgia
No. 739. Mrs. Ida Hughes v. State of Georgia. Error to. the Supreme Court of the State of Georgia. January 18, 1926. Messrs. Charles Clark and R. R. Jackson for plaintiff in error. No appearance for defendant in error.
Lehigh Valley Railroad v. Huben
No. 849. Lehigh Valley Railroad Company v. Anna Huben, as Administratrix, etc. January 18, 1926. Mr. Clifton P.'Williamson for petitioner. Mr. Humphrey J. Lynch for respondent.
Yankton Sioux Tribe of Indians v. United States
No. 836. Yankton Sioux Tribe of Indians v. United States. January 18, 1926. Mr. Jennings C. Wise for petitioner. Solicitor General Mitchell for the United States.
Vanderbilt v. Atlantic Coast Line Railroad
No. 387. Arthur Vanderbilt and George Wilson, Receivers of the Southern Cotton Oil Company, v. Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Company. Error to the Supreme Court of the State of North Carolina. Motion to dismiss submitted January 11, 1926. De
United States v. St. Louis, San Francisco & Texas Railway Co.
UNITED STATES v. ST. LOUIS, SAN FRANCISCO & TEXAS RAILWAY COMPANY. UNITED STATES v. WABASH RAILWAY COMPANY. APPEALS PROM THE COURT OP CLAIMS. Nos. 91 and 92. Argued November 16, 1925. Decided January 18, 1926. 1. Transportation Act, 1920, a
Lancaster v. Smith
No. 174. J. L. Lancaster et al., Receivers of the Texas & Pacific Railway v. H. L. Smith et al. Error to the Supreme Court of the State of Texas. Submitted January 4,1926. Decided January 11, 1926. Messrs. T. D. Gresham and Robert L. W. Tho
Crone v. Snook
No. 504. H. B. Crone v. John W. Snook, Warden. Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Northern District of Georgia. January 11, 1926. Mr. William Schley Howard for appellant. No appearance for appellee.
Metcalf & Eddy v. Mitchell
METCALF & EDDY v. MITCHELL, ADMINISTRATRIX. MITCHELL, ADMINISTRATRIX, v. METCALF & EDDY. ERROR TO THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS. Nos. 183 and 376. Submitted November 30, 1925. Decided January 11,
United States v. Butterworth-Judson Corp.
UNITED STATES v. BUTTERWORTH-JUDSON CORPORATION. CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT. OF APPEALS FOR THE . SECOND CIRCUIT. . ,- . No. 503. Argued November 23, 1925. Decided January 11, 1926. Where the answer of an insolvent corporation, in a su
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.