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
Stripe v. United States
STRIPE et al., RECEIVERS, v. UNITED STATES. certiorari to the circuit court of appeals for the ■ SECOND CIRCUIT. No. 496. Submitted November 23,1925. Decided January 11, 1926. Decided upon the authority of Price v. United States, ante, p. 4
Price v. United States
PRICE, RECEIVER, v. UNITED STATES. CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOE THE SECOND CIRCUIT. No. 454. Submitted. November 23, 1925. Decided January 11, 1926. .1. Taxes due tbe United States are “.debts” within the meaning of Rev. S
Bramwell v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.
BRAMWELL, SUPERINTENDENT, v. UNITED STATES FIDELITY & GUARANTY COMPANY. APPEAL FROM THIS CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT. No. 192. Argued November 23, 1925. Decided January 11, 1926. 1. Indebtedness of a bank for. Indian mone
Trusler v. Crooks
TRUSLER v. CROOKS, AS COLLECTOR AND INDIVIDUALLY. ERROR TO THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI'. No. 188. Argued November 17, 1925. Decided January 11, 1926. Section 3 of the “ Future Trading Act,” p
Independent Wireless Telegraph Co. v. Radio Corp.
INDEPENDENT WIRELESS TELEGRAPH COMPANY v. RADIO CORPORATION OF AMERICA. CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE' SECOND CIRCUIT. No. 87. Argued October 23, 1925. Decided January 11, 1926. C A suit by an exclusive licensee under a
Oklahoma v. Texas
No. 13, original. State of Oklahoma v. State of Texas, United States, Intervener. In Equity. Orders entered January 4, 1926. Announced by Mr. Justice Van Devanter.
Provost v. United States
PROVOST et al. v. UNITED STATES. APPEAL FROM .THE COURT" OF CLAIMS. No. 258. Argued November, 18, 1925. Decided January 4, 1926. 1. Transfers involved in the “ lending ” of stock and “ return ” of the stock “ borrowed,” on the New York Stoc
United States v. Anderson
UNITED STATES v. ANDERSON et al. UNITED STATES v. YALE & TOWNE MANUFACTURING COMPANY. APPEALS FROM THE COURT OF CLAIMS. Nos. 337, 420. Argued November 20,1925. Decided January 4, 1926. 1. The Revenue Act of 1916 imposed a tax on net income
United States v. River Rouge Improvement Co.
UNITED STATES v. RIVER ROUGE IMPROVEMENT COMPANY et al. ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT. No. 3. Argued March 10, 11, 1924. Decided January 4, 1926. 1. An'adjudication of a Circuit Court of Appeáls final in its na
Minneapolis, St. Paul & Sault Ste. Marie Railway Co. v. Goneau
MINNEAPOLIS, ST. PAUL & SAULT STE. MARIE RAILWAY COMPANY v. GONEAU. CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OP THE STATE OP . MINNESOTA. No. 76. Argued December 3, 1925. Decided January 4, 1926. 1. A brakeman, in an endeavor to couple a train where
Browning v. Hooper
PERRY BROWNING et al. v. E. M. HOOPER et al. APPEAL PROM THE DISTRICT COURT OP. THE UNITED STATES POR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OP TEXAS. No. 256. Argued November 17, 1925. Decided January 4, 1926. 1. A Texas statute authorizes fifty property t
Connally v. General Construction Co.
CONNALLY, COMMISSIONER, et al. v. GENERAL CONSTRUCTION COMPANY. APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES POR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OP OKLAHOMA. No. 314. Argued November 30, December 1, 1925. Decided January 4, 1926. 1. A criminal
American Steel Foundries v. Robertson
AMERICAN STEEL FOUNDRIES v. ROBERTSON, COMMISSIONER, et al. CERTIFICATE FROM I’HE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT. No. 156. Argued November 16, 17, 1925. Decided January 4, 1926. 1. The mere fact that one person has adopted
O'Hara v. Luckenbach Steamship Co.
O’HARA et al. v. LUCKENBACH STEAMSHIP COMPANY. CERTIORARI to the united states circuit court of APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT. No. 224. Argued November 19, 1925. Decided January 4, 1926. 1. Under, the requirement of the Seamen’s Act of Marc
United States v. Daugherty
UNITED STATES v. DAUGHERTY. CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OP APPEALS POR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT. No. 303. Argued December 1, 1925. Decided January 4, 1926. 1. Semble that, in view of later decisions on cognate questions, the constitutionality
Live Oak Water Users' Ass'n v. Railroad Commission
LIVE OAK WATER USERS’ ASSOCIATION et al. v. RAILROAD COMMISSION OF CALIFORNIA et al. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. No. 73. Argued October 22, 1925. Decided January 4, 1926. 1. A rate-fixing order made by a commissio
First National Bank v. Anderson
FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF GUTHRIE CENTER v. ANDERSON, COUNTY AUDITOR, et al. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OP THE STATE OP IOWA. No. 26. Argued January 27, 1925. Decided January 4, 1926. 1. In a case from a state court the question Whether the fe
New Jersey v. Sargent
NEW JERSEY v. SARGENT, ATTORNEY GENERAL, et al. No. 20, Original. Submitted October 5, 1925. Decided January 4, 1926. 1. A bill by a State for an injunction against federal officers charged with the administration of a federal statute c.an
United States v. Robbins
UNITED STATES v. ROBBINS et al. ERROR TO THE'DISTRICT COURT OE THE UNITED STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. No. 493. Argued December 7, 8, 1925. Decided January 4, 1926. 1. A judgment of the District Court in an action against
Oklahoma v. Texas
OKLAHOMA v. TEXAS. No. 13, Original. Decree announced January 4, 1926. Decree (1)' confirming report of commissioners showing that they have run, located and marked portions of the interstate boundary along the south bank of Red River, othe
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.