Log In
  • India
  • UK & Ireland
CaseMine Logo
Please enter at least 3 characters.
Parallel Search is an AI-driven legal research functionality that uses natural language understanding to find conceptually relevant case law, even without exact keyword matches.
Hi, I'm AMICUS. Your GPT powered virtual legal assistant. Let's chat.
  • Parallel Search NEW
  • CaseIQ
  • AMICUS (Powered by GPT)
  • Federal
    U.S. Supreme Court
    Federal Circuit
    1st Circuit
    2d Circuit
    3d Circuit
    4th Circuit
    5th Circuit
    6th Circuit
    7th Circuit
    8th Circuit
    9th Circuit
    10th Circuit
    11th Circuit
    Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
    Board of Immigration Appeals
    Special Courts
    Bankruptcy
  • State
    Alabama
    Alaska
    Arkansas
    Arizona
    California
    Colorado
    Connecticut
    Delaware
    District Of Columbia
    Florida
    Georgia
    Guam
    Hawaii
    Iowa
    Idaho
    Illinois
    Indiana
    Kansas
    Kentucky
    Louisiana
    Massachusetts
    Maryland
    Maine
    Michigan
    Minnesota
    Missouri
    Mississippi
    Montana
    Nebraska
    North Carolina
    North Dakota
    New Hampshire
    New Jersey
    Northern Mariana Islands
    New Mexico
    Nevada
    New York
    Ohio
    Oklahoma
    Oregon
    Pennsylvania
    Puerto Rico
    Rhode Island
    South Carolina
    South Dakota
    Tennessee
    Texas
    Utah
    Virginia
    Vermont
    Washington
    Wisconsin
    West Virginia
    Wyoming
Log In Sign Up US Judgments
  • India
  • UK & Ireland

Alert

How is this helpful for me?

  • Creating your profile on CaseMine allows you to build your network with fellow lawyers and prospective clients. Once you create your profile, you will be able to:
    1. Claim the judgments where you have appeared by linking them directly to your profile and maintain a record of your body of work.
    2. Interact directly with CaseMine users looking for advocates in your area of specialization.
  • Creating a unique profile web page containing interviews, posts, articles, as well as the cases you have appeared in, greatly enhances your digital presence on search engines such Google and Bing, resulting in increased client interest.
  • The cases linked on your profile facilitate Casemine's artificial intelligence engine in recommending you to potential clients who might be interested in availing your services for similar matters.

  Know more  

Create your profile now
  • Commentaries

Scotland Case Commentaries

Non-Appealability of Sheriff's Decisions on Memorandum Registrations under the Workmen's Compensation Act 1897

Non-Appealability of Sheriff's Decisions on Memorandum Registrations under the Workmen's Compensation Act 1897

Date: Nov 27, 1901
Non-Appealability of Sheriff's Decisions on Memorandum Registrations under the Workmen's Compensation Act 1897 Introduction The case of Cammick v. The Glasgow Iron and Steel Co., Ltd ([1901] SLR...
Pumpherston Oil Co. Ltd v. Wilson (1901) SLR 38_830: Deduction of Maintenance Costs in Poor Rate Assessments

Pumpherston Oil Co. Ltd v. Wilson (1901) SLR 38_830: Deduction of Maintenance Costs in Poor Rate Assessments

Date: Jul 20, 1901
Pumpherston Oil Co. Ltd v. Wilson (1901) SLR 38_830: Deduction of Maintenance Costs in Poor Rate Assessments Introduction Pumpherston Oil Co., Ltd v. Wilson ([1901] SLR 38_830) is a pivotal case...
Reinforcing the Necessity of Demonstrating Malice in Defamation Claims under Privileged Circumstances: Macdonald v. M'Coll [1901]

Reinforcing the Necessity of Demonstrating Malice in Defamation Claims under Privileged Circumstances: Macdonald v. M'Coll [1901]

Date: Jul 19, 1901
Reinforcing the Necessity of Demonstrating Malice in Defamation Claims under Privileged Circumstances: Macdonald v. M'Coll [1901] Introduction The case of Macdonald v. M'Coll ([1901] SLR 38_781) is a...
Assumption of Risk in Tenancy: The Landmark Decision in M'Manus v. Armour (1901)

Assumption of Risk in Tenancy: The Landmark Decision in M'Manus v. Armour (1901)

Date: Jul 11, 1901
Assumption of Risk in Tenancy: The Landmark Decision in M'Manus v. Armour (1901) Introduction The case of M'Manus v. Armour ([1901] SLR 38_791) is a seminal decision rendered by the Scottish Court of...
Withholding Rent for Non-Habitable Premises: M'Donald v. Kydd Commentary

Withholding Rent for Non-Habitable Premises: M'Donald v. Kydd Commentary

Date: Jun 15, 1901
Withholding Rent for Non-Habitable Premises: M'Donald v. Kydd Commentary Introduction The case of M'Donald v. Kydd ([1901] SLR 38_697) adjudicated by the Scottish Court of Session on June 14, 1901,...
Duty of Employers to Ensure Safety of Their Premises: Innes v. Fife Coal Co., Ltd. (1901)

Duty of Employers to Ensure Safety of Their Premises: Innes v. Fife Coal Co., Ltd. (1901)

Date: Jan 11, 1901
Duty of Employers to Ensure Safety of Their Premises: Innes v. Fife Coal Co., Ltd. (1901) Introduction The case of Innes v. Fife Coal Co., Ltd. ([1901] SLR 38_239) is a landmark decision rendered by...
Cadzow Coal Co. v. Gaffney: Establishing Criteria for Average Weekly Earnings Under the Workmen's Compensation Act 1897

Cadzow Coal Co. v. Gaffney: Establishing Criteria for Average Weekly Earnings Under the Workmen's Compensation Act 1897

Date: Nov 7, 1900
Cadzow Coal Co. v. Gaffney: Establishing Criteria for Average Weekly Earnings Under the Workmen's Compensation Act 1897 Introduction Cadzow Coal Co., Ltd v. Gaffney ([1900] SLR 38_40) is a landmark...
Allocation of Legal Expenses Among Co-defendants: Insights from Mackintosh v Galbraith and Arthur

Allocation of Legal Expenses Among Co-defendants: Insights from Mackintosh v Galbraith and Arthur

Date: Nov 7, 1900
Allocation of Legal Expenses Among Co-defendants: Insights from Mackintosh v Galbraith and Arthur Introduction Mackintosh v Galbraith and Arthur ([1900] SLR 38_53) is a significant case adjudicated...
Clarifying Average Weekly Earnings Calculation for Short-Term Employment under the Workmen's Compensation Act 1897: Russell v. M'Cluskey (1900)

Clarifying Average Weekly Earnings Calculation for Short-Term Employment under the Workmen's Compensation Act 1897: Russell v. M'Cluskey (1900)

Date: Jul 21, 1900
Clarifying Average Weekly Earnings Calculation for Short-Term Employment under the Workmen's Compensation Act 1897: Russell v. M'Cluskey (1900) Introduction The case of Russell v. M'Cluskey ([1900]...
Browne's Trustees v. Browne (1900): Establishing Principles of Substitution in Trust Law

Browne's Trustees v. Browne (1900): Establishing Principles of Substitution in Trust Law

Date: May 18, 1900
Browne's Trustees v. Browne (1900): Establishing Principles of Substitution in Trust Law 1. Introduction Browne's Trustees v. Browne ([1900] SLR 37_673) is a landmark case adjudicated by the Scottish...
Freeland v. Macfarlane, Lang, & Co. (1900): Redefining Compensation under the Workmen’s Compensation Act 1897

Freeland v. Macfarlane, Lang, & Co. (1900): Redefining Compensation under the Workmen’s Compensation Act 1897

Date: Mar 21, 1900
Freeland v. Macfarlane, Lang, & Co. (1900): Redefining Compensation under the Workmen’s Compensation Act 1897 Introduction The case of Freeland v. Macfarlane, Lang, & Co. ([1900] SLR 37_599)...
Establishing Railway Companies as Undertakers under the Workmen's Compensation Act 1897: Burns v. North British Railway Co.

Establishing Railway Companies as Undertakers under the Workmen's Compensation Act 1897: Burns v. North British Railway Co.

Date: Feb 21, 1900
Establishing Railway Companies as Undertakers under the Workmen's Compensation Act 1897: Burns v. North British Railway Co. Introduction Burns v. North British Railway Co. ([1900] SLR 37_448) is a...
Integral Operations and Employer Liability under the Workmen's Compensation Act 1897: Bee v. Thomas Ovens & Sons

Integral Operations and Employer Liability under the Workmen's Compensation Act 1897: Bee v. Thomas Ovens & Sons

Date: Jan 26, 1900
Integral Operations and Employer Liability under the Workmen's Compensation Act 1897: Bee v. Thomas Ovens & Sons Introduction Bee v. Thomas Ovens & Sons ([1900] SLR 37_328) is a pivotal judgment...
Contributory Negligence in Premises Liability: Driscoll v. Partick Burgh Commissioners

Contributory Negligence in Premises Liability: Driscoll v. Partick Burgh Commissioners

Date: Jan 11, 1900
Contributory Negligence in Premises Liability: Driscoll v. Partick Burgh Commissioners Introduction The case of Driscoll v. Partick Burgh Commissioners ([1900] SLR 37_274) presents a pivotal...
Pollok v. Workman (1900): Establishing Joint Title Requirements in Defamation Actions

Pollok v. Workman (1900): Establishing Joint Title Requirements in Defamation Actions

Date: Jan 10, 1900
Pollok v. Workman (1900): Establishing Joint Title Requirements in Defamation Actions Introduction Pollok v. Workman ([1900] SLR 37_270) is a landmark decision by the Scottish Court of Session that...
Todd v. Caledonian Railway Co.: Expanding the Scope of Workmen's Compensation

Todd v. Caledonian Railway Co.: Expanding the Scope of Workmen's Compensation

Date: Jun 30, 1899
Todd v. Caledonian Railway Co.: Expanding the Scope of Workmen's Compensation Introduction Todd v. Caledonian Railway Co. ([1899] SLR 36_784) is a landmark case adjudicated by the Scottish Court of...
Judicial Interpretation of 'Claim for Compensation' under the Workmen's Compensation Act 1897: Bennett v. Wordie & Co. (1899)

Judicial Interpretation of 'Claim for Compensation' under the Workmen's Compensation Act 1897: Bennett v. Wordie & Co. (1899)

Date: May 17, 1899
Judicial Interpretation of 'Claim for Compensation' under the Workmen's Compensation Act 1897: Bennett v. Wordie & Co. (1899) Introduction The case of Bennett v. Wordie & Co. ([1899] SLR 36_643)...
Geary v. William Dixon Ltd (1899): Interpretation of Compensation Under the Workmen's Compensation Act 1897

Geary v. William Dixon Ltd (1899): Interpretation of Compensation Under the Workmen's Compensation Act 1897

Date: May 13, 1899
Geary v. William Dixon Ltd (1899): Interpretation of Compensation Under the Workmen's Compensation Act 1897 Introduction Geary v. William Dixon, Ltd ([1899] SLR 36_640) is a seminal case adjudicated...
Exclusion of Shipboard Machinery from Factory Definition under the Workmen's Compensation Act 1897

Exclusion of Shipboard Machinery from Factory Definition under the Workmen's Compensation Act 1897

Date: Mar 17, 1899
Exclusion of Shipboard Machinery from Factory Definition under the Workmen's Compensation Act 1897 Introduction The case of The Aberdeen Steam Trawling and Fishing Co., Ltd v. Peters ([1899] SLR...
Holograph I O U as a Document of Debt: Insights from Thiem's Trustees v. Collie

Holograph I O U as a Document of Debt: Insights from Thiem's Trustees v. Collie

Date: Mar 16, 1899
Holograph I O U as a Document of Debt: Insights from Thiem's Trustees v. Collie 1. Introduction Thiem's Trustees v. Collie ([1899] SLR 36_557) is a pivotal case adjudicated by the Scottish Court of...
Previous   Next
CaseMine Logo

Know us better!

  • Request a Demo
  • Watch Casemine overview Videos

Company

  • About Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms
  • Careers
  • Columns
  • Contact Us

Help

  • Pricing
  • Help & Support
  • Features
  • Workflow
  • CaseMine API
  • CaseMine's Bespoke AI Solutions
  • Judge Signup
  • Student Signup

CaseMine Tools

  • CaseIQ
  • Judgment Search
  • Parallel Search
  • AttorneyIQ
  • Browse Cases

© 2023 Gauge Data Solutions Pvt. Ltd.

Summary

Alert