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
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
Davis v. Williford
DAVIS et al. v. WILLIFORD et al. certiorari to the supreme court of the state of OKLAHOMA. No. 316. Submitted May 4, 1926. Decided June 1, 1926. 1. Caso held reviewable by certiorari and not by writ of error. P. 486. 2. Under the Act of Apr
Ma-King Products Co. v. Blair
MA-KING PRODUCTS COMPANY v. BLAIR, COMMISSIONER. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT. No. 333. Argued May 7, 1926. Decided June 1, 1926. 1. Under the Prohibition Act, the Commissioner of' Internal Revenue may refu
Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co. v. Coogan
CHICAGO, MILWAUKEE & ST. PAUL RAILWAY COMPANY v. COOGAN, SPECIAL ADMINISTRATRIX, etc. CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. No. 268. Argued April 26, 1926. Decided June 1, 1926. 1. 'Upon review of a judgment of a state
United States v. Ramsey
UNITED STATES v. RAMSEY et al. ERROR TO THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA. No. 1061. Argued April 22, 1926. Decided June 1, 1926. 1. The authority of the United States to punish crimes committed by or aga
Ex parte Buder
EX PARTE BUDER. MOTION POR LEAVE TO PILE PETITION POR WRIT OP MANDAMUS. —, Original. Motion submitted March 1, 1926. Denied June 1, 1926. 1. This Court has power to issue a writ of mandamus to compel a lower federal court to allow an appeal
Home Furniture Co. v. United States
HOME FURNITURE COMPANY et al. v. UNITED STATES et al. APPEAL PROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT POR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OP TEXAS, No. 324. Argued and submitted May 6, 1926. Decided June 1, 1926. An order of the Interstate Commerce Commi
Kansas City Terminal Railway Co. v. Central Union Trust Co.
KANSAS CITY TERMINAL RAILWAY COMPANY et al. v. CENTRAL UNION TRUST COMPANY OF NEW YORK et al. ON CERTIFICATE FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT. No. 265. Argued April 23, 1926. Decided June 1, 1926. 1. Where the proper
United States v. Candelaria
UNITED STATES v. CANDELARIA et al. ON CERTIFICATE FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT. No. 208. Argued November 18, 19, 1925. Decided June 1, 1926. 1. The Pueblo Indian tribes in New Mexico are dependent communities und
Old Colony Trust Co. v. City of Seattle
OLD COLONY TRUST COMPANY v. CITY OF SEATTLE et al. APPEAL PROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT POR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OP WASHINGTON. - No. 194. Argued March 5, 1926. Decided June 1, 1926. Í. In a suit in the District Court to enjoin dist
Thornton v. United States
THORNTON et al. v. UNITED STATES. CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT. No. 255. Argued April 20, 1926. Decided June 1, 1926. 1. Regulations of the Secretary of Agriculture issued pursuant to statute' are noticed
Appleby v. Delaney
APPLEBY et al. v. DELANEY, COMMISSIONER. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK. No. 16. Argued October 7, 1925; reargued March 1, 2, 1926. Decided June 1, 1926. 1. Acting under general authority contained in a New York statute
Appleby v. City of New York
APPLEBY et al. v. CITY OF NEW YORK et al. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OP NEW YORK. No. 15. Argued October 7, 1925; reargued March 1, 2, 1926. Decided June 1, 1926. 1. Upon review' of a decision of a state court enforcing a state
States v. Minnesota
No. 17, original. United States v. Minnesota. May 24, 1926. See 270 U. S. 181.
United States v. Katz
UNITED STATES v. KATZ et al. THE SAME v. FEUERSTEIN et al. error to the united states district court for the EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA. Nos. 726, 727. Argued March 11, 1926. Decided May 24, 1926. 1. Section 10 of the Prohibition Act,
Blair v. United States ex rel. Birkenstock
BLAIR, COMMISSIONER, v. UNITED STATES ex rel. BIRKENSTOCK et al., EXECUTORS, etc. CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE DISTRICT OF • COLUMBIA. No. 713. Argued May 4, 1926. Decided May 24, 1926. Under § 1019 of the Revenue Act of 1924y
St. Louis-San Francisco Railway Co. v. Mills
ST. LOUIS-SAN FRANCISCO RAILWAY COMPANY v. MILLS, ADMINISTRATRIX. CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT. No. 264. Argued April 22, 23, 1926. Decided May 24, 1926. 1. An employer, by voluntarily furnishing a guard
Lederer v. McGarvey
LEDERER, FORMER COLLECTOR, v. McGARVEY, EXECUTRIX. ON CERTIFICATE FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT. No. 120. Argued March 3, 1926. Decided May 24, 1926. When, upon the hearing of a certificate from the Circuit Court o
United States v. Zerbey
UNITED STATES v. ZERBEY et al. ON CERTIFICATE FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT. No. 790. Argued March 3, 1926. Decided May 24, 1926. A surety bond, required by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue under § 6, Tit. II o
Corrigan v. Buckley
CORRIGAN et al. v. BUCKLEY. appeal' from the court of appeals of the district of . COLUMBIA. No. 104. Argued January 8, 1926. Decided May 24, 1926. 1. This Court has no jurisdiction of an appeal from the Court of Appeals of the District of
Hay v. May Department Stores Co.
HAY v. MAY DEPARTMENT STORES COMPANY et al. ERROR TO THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI. No. 292. Submitted April 29, 1926. Decided May 24, 1926. 1. A motion to remand upon the ground that the suit is not
Culver v. United States
CULVER v. UNITED STATES. CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF CLAIMS. No. 816. Submitted April 12, 1926. Decided May 24, 1926. After issuance by the President of Army Regulation 1269%, an officer of flying status assigned to the War College, as a stu
United States v. Pittsburgh & West Virginia Railway Co.
UNITED STATES v. PITTSBURGH & WEST VIRGINIA RAILWAY COMPANY et al. PITTSBURGH & WEST VIRGINIA RAILWAY COMPANY et al. v. UNITED STATES. APPEALS FROM THE COURT OF CLAIMS. Nos. 864, 865. Argued March 11, 1926. Decided May 24, 1926. 1. Under §
Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway Co. v. Oklahoma
MISSOURI, KANSAS & TEXAS RAILWAY COMPANY et al. v. OKLAHOMA et al. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OP THE STATE OP OKLAHOMA. No. 205. Submitted March 5, 1926. Decided May 24, 1926. 1. A contract between a city and a railroad company the enforcem
Henkels v. Sutherland
HENKELS v. SUTHERLAND, ALIEN PROPERTY CUSTODIAN, et al. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE , SECOND CIRCUIT. No. 318. Argued May 5, 6, 1926. Decided May 24, 1926. In a suit by an American citizen under the Trading with the Ene
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.