Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change
Find the right lawyer for your legal problem

Faster, Smarter and More Accurate

Supreme Court of the United States

Find Case Laws by Filters
Sort byYou can sort data by applying different sort criteria
Most Lastest
Most Earliest
The Last Three Years
Rumford Chem. Wks. v. Hygienic Chem. Co., Nos. 9, 121 (1909)
Supreme Court of the United States Filed: Nov. 29, 1909

215 U.S. 156 (1909) RUMFORD CHEMICAL WORKS v. HYGIENIC CHEMICAL COMPANY OF NEW JERSEY. HYGIENIC CHEMICAL COMPANY OF NEW YORK v. RUMFORD CHEMICAL WORKS. Nos. 9, 121. Supreme Court of United States. Argued November 1, 1909. Decided November 29, 1909. CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT. CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT. Mr. Philip Mauro, with whom Mr. C.A.L. Massie was on the brief, for Rumford Chemical Works. Mr. Edwin T. Rice, with...

# 1
The Eugene F. Moran, Nos. 87, 88 (1909)
Supreme Court of the United States Filed: Feb. 23, 1909

212 U.S. 466 (1909) THE EUGENE F. MORAN. [1] Nos. 87, 88. Supreme Court of United States. Argued January 22, 25, 1909. Decided February 23, 1909. CERTIFICATES FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT. *467 Mr. James Emerson Carpenter, with whom Mr. Samuel Park and Mr. James Keith Symmers were on the brief, for the Henry Dubois Sons Company. Mr. Archibald G. Thacher and Mr. Frederick M. Brown for New York Central and Hudson River Railroad Company. Mr. Harrington Putnam, with whom...

# 2
Expanded Metal Co. v. Bradford, Nos. 66 and 606 (1909)
Supreme Court of the United States Filed: Jun. 01, 1909

214 U.S. 366 (1909) EXPANDED METAL COMPANY v. BRADFORD. GENERAL FIREPROOFING COMPANY v. EXPANDED METAL COMPANY. Nos. 66, 606. Supreme Court of United States. Argued March 18, 19, 1909. Decided June 1, 1909. CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT. CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT. *367 Mr. Ernest Howard Hunter for the Expanded Metal Co., petitioner in No. 66 and respondent in No. 606. Mr. Frederick P. Fish and Mr. Thomas W. Bakewell, with...

# 3
Keller v. United States, Nos. 653, 654 (1909)
Supreme Court of the United States Filed: Apr. 05, 1909

213 U.S. 138 (1909) KELLER v. UNITED STATES. ULLMAN v. UNITED STATES. Nos. 653, 654. Supreme Court of United States. Argued March 1, 1909. Decided April 5, 1909. ERROR TO THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS. *140 Mr. Benjamin C. Bachrach, with whom Mr. Elijah N. Zoline was on the brief, for plaintiffs in error. Mr. Assistant Attorney General Fowler for defendant in error. *143 MR. JUSTICE BREWER, after making the foregoing statement, delivered the...

# 4
United States Ex Rel. Attorney General v. Delaware & Hudson Co., Nos. 559, 560, 561, 562, 563, 564, 565, 566, 567, (1909)

213 U.S. 366 (1909) THE UNITED STATES ex rel. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES v. DELAWARE AND HUDSON COMPANY. SAME v. ERIE RAILROAD COMPANY. SAME v. CENTRAL RAILROAD COMPANY OF NEW JERSEY. SAME v. DELAWARE, LACKAWANNA AND WESTERN RAILROAD COMPANY. SAME v. PENNSYLVANIA RAILROAD COMPANY. SAME v. LEHIGH VALLEY RAILROAD COMPANY. THE UNITED STATES, APPELLANT, v. DELAWARE AND HUDSON COMPANY. SAME v. ERIE RAILROAD COMPANY. SAME v. CENTRAL RAILROAD COMPANY OF NEW JERSEY. SAME v. DELAWARE,...

# 5
Commissioners of Santa Fé Cty. v. New Mexico Ex Rel. Coler, Nos. 42, 43 (1909)
Supreme Court of the United States Filed: Dec. 20, 1909

215 U.S. 296 (1909) COMMISSIONERS OF SANTA FE COUNTY v. TERRITORY OF NEW MEXICO EX REL. COLER. SAME v. SAME. Nos. 42, 43. Supreme Court of United States. Submitted November 29, 1909. Decided December 20, 1909. APPEALS FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE TERRITORY OF NEW MEXICO. *297 Mr. A.B. Renehan for appellant. Mr. Charles A. Spiess for appellee. *299 MR. JUSTICE McKENNA delivered the opinion of the court. These appeals are prosecuted to review judgments of the Supreme Court of New Mexico,...

# 6
American Express Co. v. United States, Nos. 405, 406, 407, 408, 409 (1909)
Supreme Court of the United States Filed: Feb. 23, 1909

212 U.S. 522 (1909) AMERICAN EXPRESS COMPANY v. UNITED STATES. NATIONAL EXPRESS COMPANY v. SAME. UNITED STATES EXPRESS COMPANY v. SAME. WELLS, FARGO AND COMPANY v. SAME. ADAMS EXPRESS COMPANY v. SAME. Nos. 405, 406, 407, 408, 409. Supreme Court of United States. Argued November 10, 11, 1908. Decided February 23, 1909. APPEALS FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS. *523 Mr. Lawrence Maxwell, with whom Mr. Lewis Cass Ledyard, Mr. Frank H. Platt, Mr....

# 7
Willcox v. Consolidated Gas Co., Nos. 396, 397, 398 (1909)
Supreme Court of the United States Filed: Jan. 04, 1909

212 U.S. 19 (1909) WILLCOX et al., CONSTITUTING THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION OF NEW YORK, v. CONSOLIDATED GAS COMPANY. CITY OF NEW YORK v. CONSOLIDATED GAS COMPANY OF NEW YORK. JACKSON, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, v. CONSOLIDATED GAS COMPANY. Nos. 396, 397, 398. Supreme Court of United States. Argued November 4, 5, 6, 1908. Decided January 4, 1909. [1] Opinion filed January 12, 1909. APPEALS FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK. *25...

# 8
Steward v. American Lava Co., Nos. 27, 28 (1909)
Supreme Court of the United States Filed: Nov. 29, 1909

215 U.S. 161 (1909) STEWARD v. AMERICAN LAVA COMPANY. MORITZ KIRCHBERGER v. AMERICAN LAVA COMPANY. Nos. 27, 28. Supreme Court of United States. Argued November 10, 11, 1909. Decided November 29, 1909. CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT. Mr. Charles Neave, with whom Mr. F.P. Fish and Mr. William G. McKnight were on the brief, for petitioners. Mr. Louis C. Raegener for respondents. MR. JUSTICE HOLMES delivered the opinion of the court. These are bills in equity...

# 9
Collins v. O'NEIL, Nos. 241 and 320 (1909)

214 U.S. 113 (1909) COLLINS v. O'NEIL, SHERIFF. SAME v. THE SHERIFF OF THE CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO. Nos. 241, 320. Supreme Court of United States. Argued April 5, 1909. Decided May 17, 1909. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. *116 Mr. George D. Collins, plaintiff in error and appellant, pro se, submitted. Mr. William Hoff Cook, for defendants in error and appellees. *120 MR....

# 10
Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Chicago, & St. Louis Railway v. Lightheiser, Nos. 221, 222, and 223 (1909)
Supreme Court of the United States Filed: Jan. 04, 1909

212 U.S. 560 29 S. Ct. 688 53 L. Ed. 652 PITTSBURGH, CINCINNATI, CHICAGO, & ST. LOUIS RAILWAY COMPANY, Plaintiff in Error, v. GEORGE W. LIGHTHEISER. NO 141. PITTSBURGH, CINCINNATI, CHICAGO, & ST. LOUIS RAILWAY COMPANY, Plaintiff in Error, v. THOMAS COLLINS. NO 142. PITTSBURGH, CINCINNATI, CHICAGO, & ST. LOUIS RAILWAY COMPANY, Plaintiff in Error, v. WILLIAM R. ROSS. NO 178. Supreme Court of the United States December 7, 1908 Mr. Allen Zollars for plaintiff in error. Mr. Stewart T. McConnell for...

# 11
Fritzlen v. Boatmen's Bank, 99 (1909)
Supreme Court of the United States Filed: Feb. 23, 1909

212 U.S. 364 (1909) FRITZLEN v. BOATMEN'S BANK. No. 99. Supreme Court of United States. Argued January 28, 29, 1909. Decided February 23, 1909. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF KANSAS. Mr. D.R. Hite, with whom Mr. H.J. Bone and Mr. F.C. Price were on the brief, for plaintiffs in error. Mr. James S. Botsford, with whom Mr. Buckner F. Deatherage and Mr. Odus G. Young were on the brief, for defendant in error. MR. JUSTICE WHITE delivered the opinion of the court. On the twenty-third of...

# 12
Mammoth Mining Co. v. Grand Central Mining Co., 97 (1909)
Supreme Court of the United States Filed: Mar. 08, 1909

213 U.S. 72 (1909) MAMMOTH MINING COMPANY v. GRAND CENTRAL MINING COMPANY. No. 97. Supreme Court of United States. Argued January 28, 1909. Decided March 8, 1909. ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF UTAH AND THE DISTRICT COURT OF JUAB COUNTY, STATE OF UTAH. Mr. Charles J. Hughes, Junior, with whom Mr. R.N. Baskin, Mr. Everard Bierer, Junior, Mr. Aldis B. Browne and Mr. Alexander Britton were on the brief, for plaintiff in error. Mr. William H. Dickson, with whom Mr. Henry P. Henderson...

# 13
Bagley v. General Fire Extinguisher Co., 96 (1909)
Supreme Court of the United States Filed: Feb. 23, 1909

212 U.S. 477 (1909) BAGLEY v. GENERAL FIRE EXTINGUISHER COMPANY. No. 96. Supreme Court of United States. Argued January 27, 1909. Decided February 23, 1909. ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT. Mr. Henry B. Closson for plaintiff in error. Mr. Peter B. Olney for defendant in error. *478 MR. JUSTICE HOLMES delivered the opinion of the court. This is an action for damage caused by the melting on a hot day of fusible sprinkler heads in an automatic sprinkler put up in the...

# 14
Hurley v. Atchison, T. & SFR Co., 95 (1909)
Supreme Court of the United States Filed: Apr. 05, 1909

213 U.S. 126 (1909) HURLEY, TRUSTEE IN BANKRUPTCY OF THE ESTATE OF THE MOUNT CARMEL COAL COMPANY, BANKRUPT, APPELLANTS, v. THE ATCHISON, TOPEKA AND SANTA FE RAILWAY COMPANY. No. 95. Supreme Court of United States. Argued January 26, 27, 1909. Decided April 5, 1909. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT. *129 Mr. Frank Hagerman, with whom Mr. John S. Dean was on the brief, for appellants. Mr. Robert Dunlap, with whom Mr. Wm. H. Smith and Mr. Gardiner Lathrop were on the...

# 15
Coder v. Arts, 93 (1909)
Supreme Court of the United States Filed: Apr. 05, 1909

213 U.S. 223 (1909) CODER, TRUSTEE OF ARMSTRONG, BANKRUPT, v. ARTS. No. 93. Supreme Court of United States. Argued January 26, 1909. Decided April 5, 1909. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT. *224 Mr. Myron L. Learned, for appellant. Mr. George S. Wright, with whom Mr. Robert E. O'Hanly was on the brief, for appellee. *227 MR. JUSTICE DAY delivered the opinion of the court. Alexander Armstrong, upon a petition in voluntary bankruptcy, was adjudicated a bankrupt by...

# 16
Crawford v. United States, 92 (1909)
Supreme Court of the United States Filed: Feb. 01, 1909

212 U.S. 183 (1909) CRAWFORD v. UNITED STATES. No. 92. Supreme Court of United States. Argued October 13, 14, 1908. Decided February 1, 1909. CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. *186 Mr. A.S. Worthington for petitioner. The Attorney General and Mr. Holmes Conrad, Special Assistant to the Attorney General, with whom The Solicitor General was on the brief, for the United States. *188 MR. JUSTICE PECKHAM, after making the foregoing statement, delivered the opinion of...

# 17
Harten v. Loeffler, 91 (1909)
Supreme Court of the United States Filed: Feb. 23, 1909

212 U.S. 397 (1909) HARTEN v. LOFFLER. No. 91. Supreme Court of United States. Argued January 26, 1909. Decided February 23, 1909. ERROR TO THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. *403 Mr. Lorenzo A. Bailey for plaintiff in error. Mr. Leon Tobriner, for defendant in error, submitted. MR. JUSTICE PECKHAM, after making the foregoing statement, delivered the opinion of the court. The defendant in error objects that this court is without jurisdiction on the ground of the amount in...

# 18
United States v. National Exchange Bank of Providence, 90 (1909)
Supreme Court of the United States Filed: Jun. 01, 1909

214 U.S. 302 (1909) UNITED STATES v. NATIONAL EXCHANGE BANK OF PROVIDENCE. No. 90. Supreme Court of United States. Argued January 25, 26, 1909. Decided June 1, 1909. ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT. *305 Mr. Assistant Attorney General Fowler, for plaintiff in error, submitted. *307 Mr. Theodore Francis Green for defendant in error. *309 MR. JUSTICE WHITE, after making the foregoing statement, delivered the opinion of the court. A preliminary matter needs to be...

# 19
Chesapeake & Ohio R. Co. v. McCabe, 89 (1909)
Supreme Court of the United States Filed: Apr. 05, 1909

213 U.S. 207 (1909) CHESAPEAKE AND OHIO RAILWAY COMPANY v. McCABE, ADMINISTRATRIX. No. 89. Supreme Court of United States. Argued January 25, 1909. Decided April 5, 1909. ERROR TO THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF KENTUCKY. *212 Mr. E.L. Worthington, with whom Mr. W.H. Wadsworth and Mr. W.D. Cochran were on the brief, for plaintiff in error. *213 Mr. Allan D. Cole, with whom Mr. W.T. Cole was on the brief, for defendant in error. MR. JUSTICE DAY, after making the foregoing statement,...

# 20

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer