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
1959 Cases
510 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
Irvin v. Dowd
IRVIN v. DOWD, WARDEN, INDIANA STATE PRISON. No. 63. Argued January 15, 1959. Decided May 4, 1959. James D. Lopp and Theodore Lockyear, Jr. argued the cause for petitioner. With them on the brief was James D.Nafe. Richard M. Givan', Assista
Federal Trade Commission v. Mandel Bros.
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION v. MANDEL BROTHERS, INC. No. 234. Argued March 23, 1959. Decided May 4, 1959. Daniel M. Friedman argued the cause for petitioner. With him on the brief were Solicitor General Rankin, Assistant Attorney■ General Hans
Frank v. Maryland
FRANK v. MARYLAND. No. 278. Argued March 5, 1959. Decided May 4, 1959. Benjamin Lipsitz argued the cause and filed a brief for appellant. C. Ferdinand■ Sybert, Attorney General of Maryland', and James H. Norris, Jr., Special Assistant Attor
Plumbers, Steamfitters, Refrigeration, Petroleum Fitters, & Apprentices of Local 298 v. County of Door
PLUMBERS, STEAMFITTERS, REFRIGERATION, PETROLEUM FITTERS, AND APPRENTICES OF LOCAL 298, A. F. OF L., et al. v. COUNTY OF DOOR et al. No. 396. Argued March 26, 1959. Decided May 4, 1959. David Previant argued the cause for petitioners. .With
Scull v. Virginia ex rel. Committee on Law Reform & Racial Activities
SCULL v. VIRGINIA ex rel. COMMITTEE ON LAW REFORM AND RACIAL ACTIVITIES. No. 51. Argued November 18, 1958. Decided May 4, 1959. Joseph L. Rauh,. Jr. argued the cause for petitioner. With him on the brief were John Silard and Karl Sorg. Lesl
Cepero v. Pan American Airways, Inc.
No. 658, Misc. Cepero v. Pan American Airways, Inc. Petitioner pro se. Robert C. Barnard for respondent.
Orlando v. Robinson
No. 775. Orlando v. Robinson, District Director, Immigration and Naturalization Service. Anna R. Lavin for petitioner. Solicitor General Rankin, Assistant Attorney General Wilkey, Beatrice Rosenberg and Carl H. Imlay for respondent.
Wright v. Cincinnati, New Orleans & Texas Pacific Railway Co.
No. 737. Wright v. Cincinnati, New Orleans & Texas Pacific Railway Co. Otto F. Putnick and Jerome Goldman for petitioner. Henry Burton Street for respondent.
Stirone v. United States
No. 722. Stirone v. United States. Vincent M. Casey. for petitioner. Solicitor: General Rankin, Assistant Attorney General Anderson, Beatrice Rosenberg and Theodore George Gilinsky for thé United States.
Don McCullagh, Inc. v. Michigan
DON McCULLAGH, INC., v. MICHIGAN, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE. No. 756. Decided April 27, 1959. Anthony A. Vermeulen for appellant. Paul L. Adams, Attorney General of Michigan, Samuel J. Torina, Solicitor General, and. William D. Dexter, Assistan
Commercial Barge Lines, Inc. v. United States
COMMERCIAL BARGE LINES, INC., et al. v. UNITED STATES et al. No. 721. Decided April 27, 1959. - Dudley B. Tenney and Nuel D. Belnap for appellants. Solicitor General Rankin, Assistant Attorney General Hansen, Robert W. Ginnane and Charlie H
Commercial Communications, Inc. v. Public Utilities Commission of California
COMMERCIAL COMMUNICATIONS, INC., et al. v. PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF CALIFORNIA et al. No. 719. Decided April 27, 1959. Frederick M. Rowe for appellants. J. Thomason Phelps for the Public Utilities Commission of California, and Arthur
Felter v. Southern Pacific Co.
FELTER v. SOUTHERN PACIFIC CO. et al. No. 269. Argued March 24, 1959. Decided April 27, 1959. Harry E. Wilmarth argued the cause for petitioner. With him on the brief were Roland C. Davis and V. Craven Shuttleworth. Clifton Hildebrand argue
United States v. Isthmian Steamship Co.
UNITED STATES v. ISTHMIAN STEAMSHIP CO. No. 285. Argued February 25, 1959. Decided April 27, 1959. Ralph S. Spritzer argued the cause for the Uhited States^ With him on the brief were Solicitor General Rankin, Assistant Attorney General Dou
Schumacher v. Gaynor
No. 760, Misc., October Term, 1957. Schumacher v. Gaynor, Executor, et al.,
Coley v. United States
No. 708, Misc. Coley v. United States.
Carrigan v. Sunland-Tujunga Telephone Co.
No. 666, Misc. Carrigan v. Sunland-Tujunga Telephone Co. et al. Petitioner pro se. J. Thomason Phelps for the Public Utilities Commission of California, appellee.
Mounts v. Adams
No. 638, Misc. Mounts v. Adams, Warden.
Van Bogart v. Arizona
No. 603, Misc. Van Bogart v. Arizona.
Hornbeck v. Jackson
No. 610, Misc. Hornbeck, v. Jackson, Warden. Petitioner pro se. Louis J. Lefkowitz, Attorney General of New York, and Paxtpn Blair, Solicitor General, for respondent.
Hollis v. Ellis
No. 582, Misc. Hollis v. Ellis, Director, Texas Department of Corrections.
Lester v. United States
No. 446, Misc. Lester v. United States. Petitioner pro se. Solicitor General Rankin, Assistant Attorney General Anderson, Beatrice Rosenberg and Kirby W. Patterson for the United States.
Stern v. United States
No. 759. Stern et al. v. United States. Eberhard P. Deutsch and René H. Himel, Jr. for petitioners. Solicitor General Rankin, Assistant Attorney General Rice and Harry Baum for the United States.
Smoot Sand & Gravel Corp. v. District of Columbia
No. 713. Smoot Sand & Gravel Corp. v. District of Columbia. David R. Shelton for petitioner. Chester H. Gray, Milton D. Korman and Henry E. Wixon for respondent.
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.