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
  • Judgments

1st Circuit Case Commentaries

Doe v. City of Boston: Retaliation Requires But-For Causation, Decisionmaker Knowledge, and More Than Authorized or Legally Compelled Record Disclosures

Doe v. City of Boston: Retaliation Requires But-For Causation, Decisionmaker Knowledge, and More Than Authorized or Legally Compelled Record Disclosures

Date: Jan 29, 2026
Doe v. City of Boston: Title VII Retaliation Requires But-For Causation and Decisionmaker Knowledge; Authorized or Legally Compelled Record Disclosures Do Not Suffice Absent Evidence of Deviation I....
United States v. Camillo — Corroborated Hearsay and Marital Privilege Satisfy Rule 32.1 in Supervised-Release Revocations

United States v. Camillo — Corroborated Hearsay and Marital Privilege Satisfy Rule 32.1 in Supervised-Release Revocations

Date: Jan 29, 2026
Corroborated Hearsay + Marital Privilege as “Interest of Justice” Good Cause Under Rule 32.1(b)(2)(C) in Supervised-Release Revocations Case: United States v. Camillo (No. 25-1472) | Court: U.S....
Post-Rahimi Constitutionality of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(9) and the Irrelevance of “I Thought It Was Legal” Evidence Under Rehaif

Post-Rahimi Constitutionality of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(9) and the Irrelevance of “I Thought It Was Legal” Evidence Under Rehaif

Date: Jan 29, 2026
Post-Rahimi Constitutionality of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(9) and the Irrelevance of “I Thought It Was Legal” Evidence Under Rehaif Commentary on United States v. Minor, U.S. Court of Appeals for the First...
Massachusetts “Open and Gross Lewdness” (§ 16) Is Not a CIMT Absent a Lewd (Sexual) Intent Element

Massachusetts “Open and Gross Lewdness” (§ 16) Is Not a CIMT Absent a Lewd (Sexual) Intent Element

Date: Jan 29, 2026
Massachusetts “Open and Gross Lewdness” (§ 16) Is Not a CIMT Absent a Lewd (Sexual) Intent Element Introduction In Cabral Fortes Tomar v. Bondi (1st Cir. Jan. 23, 2026), the First Circuit reviewed a...
Kolackovsky v. Town of Rockport — Particularized Pleading of Injury Required for Article III Standing in Zoning-Overlay Challenges

Kolackovsky v. Town of Rockport — Particularized Pleading of Injury Required for Article III Standing in Zoning-Overlay Challenges

Date: Jan 29, 2026
Particularized Pleading of Injury Required for Article III Standing in Zoning-Overlay Challenges (Abutter and Town-Meeting Voter Status Insufficient) 1. Introduction In Kolackovsky v. Town of...
Federal Sovereign Immunity Bars FCA § 3730(h) Retaliation Suits Against Federal Employers

Federal Sovereign Immunity Bars FCA § 3730(h) Retaliation Suits Against Federal Employers

Date: Jan 29, 2026
Federal Sovereign Immunity Bars FCA § 3730(h) Retaliation Suits Against Federal Employers Introduction In UNITED STATES, ex rel. ERIK K. SARGENT v. DOUGLAS A. COLLINS (1st Cir. Jan. 22, 2026), the...
Title VI Does Not Compel Universities to Suppress Protected Political Speech, and Campus Liability Turns on Deliberate Indifference

Title VI Does Not Compel Universities to Suppress Protected Political Speech, and Campus Liability Turns on Deliberate Indifference

Date: Jan 28, 2026
Title VI Does Not Compel Universities to Suppress Protected Political Speech, and Campus Liability Turns on Deliberate Indifference Introduction StandWithUs Center for Legal Justice v. MIT returns to...
United States v. Papantoniadis — Forced Labor Under § 1589 May Be Proven Through a Workplace-Wide Climate of Fear (Including Threatened Deportation) and Contextual Evidence Beyond the Named Victim

United States v. Papantoniadis — Forced Labor Under § 1589 May Be Proven Through a Workplace-Wide Climate of Fear (Including Threatened Deportation) and Contextual Evidence Beyond the Named Victim

Date: Jan 23, 2026
United States v. Papantoniadis — Forced Labor Under § 1589 May Be Proven Through a Workplace-Wide Climate of Fear (Including Threatened Deportation) and Contextual Evidence Beyond the Named Victim...
Mongue v. The Wheatleigh Corporation: Rule 23(e) Allows Approval of a “Global” Settlement Negotiated by Counsel Representing Both a Class and Individual Plaintiffs Absent a Realized Conflict

Mongue v. The Wheatleigh Corporation: Rule 23(e) Allows Approval of a “Global” Settlement Negotiated by Counsel Representing Both a Class and Individual Plaintiffs Absent a Realized Conflict

Date: Jan 23, 2026
Mongue v. The Wheatleigh Corporation: Rule 23(e) Allows Approval of a “Global” Settlement Negotiated by Counsel Representing Both a Class and Individual Plaintiffs Absent a Realized Conflict...
United States v. Maldonado-Velazquez — Upward Variances for Firearms “Firepower” Beyond the Guidelines and No Plea Breach When Government Defends the Sentence on Appeal

United States v. Maldonado-Velazquez — Upward Variances for Firearms “Firepower” Beyond the Guidelines and No Plea Breach When Government Defends the Sentence on Appeal

Date: Jan 18, 2026
Upward Variances for Firearms “Firepower” Beyond the Guidelines and No Plea Breach When Government Defends the Sentence on Appeal I. Introduction In United States v. Maldonado-Velazquez (1st Cir....
Government-Issued License Plates as “Goods” Under the Lanham Act and the Survival of Personal-Capacity Trademark Claims Against Puerto Rico Officials

Government-Issued License Plates as “Goods” Under the Lanham Act and the Survival of Personal-Capacity Trademark Claims Against Puerto Rico Officials

Date: Jan 17, 2026
Government-Issued License Plates as “Goods” Under the Lanham Act and the Survival of Personal-Capacity Trademark Claims Against Puerto Rico Officials 1. Introduction Clemente Properties, Inc. v....
U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1 Upward Variances: Large Ammunition Quantities and Multiple (High-Capacity) Magazines as “Heartland” Aggravators, with Sentencing Rationale Inferable from the Record

U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1 Upward Variances: Large Ammunition Quantities and Multiple (High-Capacity) Magazines as “Heartland” Aggravators, with Sentencing Rationale Inferable from the Record

Date: Jan 16, 2026
U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1 Upward Variances: Large Ammunition Quantities and Multiple (High-Capacity) Magazines as “Heartland” Aggravators, with Sentencing Rationale Inferable from the Record I. Introduction...
U.S. v. Del-Valle-Camacho: Large Ammunition Quantity and Multiple (High-Capacity) Magazines as a Sufficient, Guideline-Independent Basis for an Upward Variance

U.S. v. Del-Valle-Camacho: Large Ammunition Quantity and Multiple (High-Capacity) Magazines as a Sufficient, Guideline-Independent Basis for an Upward Variance

Date: Jan 16, 2026
Large Ammunition Quantity and Multiple (High-Capacity) Magazines Can Independently Justify an Upward Variance When the Guidelines Do Not Account for That Quantity 1. Introduction In United States v....
Expert-Testimony Gatekeeping for Negligence/IIED Claims Challenging Mandated Child-Abuse Reporting; Evidence of Actual Service Denial Required for Section 504

Expert-Testimony Gatekeeping for Negligence/IIED Claims Challenging Mandated Child-Abuse Reporting; Evidence of Actual Service Denial Required for Section 504

Date: Jan 15, 2026
Expert-Testimony Gatekeeping for Negligence/IIED Claims Challenging Mandated Child-Abuse Reporting; Evidence of Actual Service Denial Required for Section 504 Case: J.S.H. v. Newton Court: United...
Time-Limited, Health-Furthering Medical Exemptions Do Not Defeat General Applicability of COVID-19 Vaccine Mandates (and Reply-Brief Individualized-Exemption Theories Are Waived)

Time-Limited, Health-Furthering Medical Exemptions Do Not Defeat General Applicability of COVID-19 Vaccine Mandates (and Reply-Brief Individualized-Exemption Theories Are Waived)

Date: Jan 10, 2026
Time-Limited, Health-Furthering Medical Exemptions Do Not Defeat General Applicability of COVID-19 Vaccine Mandates (and Reply-Brief Individualized-Exemption Theories Are Waived) Case: Brox v. Woods...
Reliance-Interest Review and the Limits of Post Hoc Declarations in APA Stay Motions: 340B Rebate Pilot Enjoined Pending Appeal

Reliance-Interest Review and the Limits of Post Hoc Declarations in APA Stay Motions: 340B Rebate Pilot Enjoined Pending Appeal

Date: Jan 8, 2026
Reliance-Interest Review and the Limits of Post Hoc Declarations in APA Stay Motions: 340B Rebate Pilot Enjoined Pending Appeal Introduction This First Circuit order arises from a high-stakes...
United States v. Mello — §3146 Failure-to-Appear Grouping Does Not Bar §3C1.1 Obstruction Enhancement (No Double Counting)

United States v. Mello — §3146 Failure-to-Appear Grouping Does Not Bar §3C1.1 Obstruction Enhancement (No Double Counting)

Date: Jan 8, 2026
§3146 Failure-to-Appear Counts, When Grouped, Do Not Create “Double Counting” That Bars a §3C1.1 Obstruction Enhancement Case: United States v. Mello (1st Cir. Jan. 7, 2026) | Court: United States...
Digital-Evidence Drug-Quantity Extrapolation and No Double Counting Between § 3146 Failure-to-Appear and § 3C1.1 Obstruction

Digital-Evidence Drug-Quantity Extrapolation and No Double Counting Between § 3146 Failure-to-Appear and § 3C1.1 Obstruction

Date: Jan 8, 2026
Digital-Evidence Drug-Quantity Extrapolation and No Double Counting Between § 3146 Failure-to-Appear and § 3C1.1 Obstruction Case: United States v. Mello (1st Cir. Jan. 7, 2026) | Court: United...
Pending Discovery Does Not Block Summary Judgment Absent Rule 56(d), and § 1983 Malicious Prosecution After a Warrant Requires a Franks-Style Falsehood or Omission

Pending Discovery Does Not Block Summary Judgment Absent Rule 56(d), and § 1983 Malicious Prosecution After a Warrant Requires a Franks-Style Falsehood or Omission

Date: Jan 8, 2026
Pending Discovery Does Not Block Summary Judgment Absent Rule 56(d), and § 1983 Malicious Prosecution After a Warrant Requires a Franks-Style Falsehood or Omission 1. Introduction In Besosa-Noceda v....
Radfar v. Covino: Off-Duty Protective-Order Litigation Is Not “Color of Law,” a Stray Ethnic Slur Alone Won’t Prove Discriminatory Purpose, and Malicious Prosecution Requires an Initiated Criminal Proceeding

Radfar v. Covino: Off-Duty Protective-Order Litigation Is Not “Color of Law,” a Stray Ethnic Slur Alone Won’t Prove Discriminatory Purpose, and Malicious Prosecution Requires an Initiated Criminal Proceeding

Date: Jan 8, 2026
Radfar v. Covino: Off-Duty Protective-Order Litigation Is Not “Color of Law,” a Stray Ethnic Slur Alone Won’t Prove Discriminatory Purpose, and Malicious Prosecution Requires an Initiated Criminal...
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