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

4th Circuit Case Commentaries

Affirmation of Death Sentences under the Federal Death Penalty Act: A Precedent in Indictment Sufficiency

Affirmation of Death Sentences under the Federal Death Penalty Act: A Precedent in Indictment Sufficiency

Date: Dec 23, 2003
Affirmation of Death Sentences under the Federal Death Penalty Act: A Precedent in Indictment Sufficiency Introduction In the landmark case of United States of America v. Dustin John Higgs, decided...
Maintaining Procurement Integrity: Insights from HARRISON v. WESTINGHOUSE SAVANNAH RIVER CO.

Maintaining Procurement Integrity: Insights from HARRISON v. WESTINGHOUSE SAVANNAH RIVER CO.

Date: Dec 20, 2003
Maintaining Procurement Integrity: Insights from HARRISON v. WESTINGHOUSE SAVANNAH RIVER CO. Introduction HARRISON v. WESTINGHOUSE SAVANNAH RIVER CO. is a pivotal case adjudicated by the United...
Affirmation of Summary Judgment in FCRA Violations: BAAF’s Compliance Standards Established

Affirmation of Summary Judgment in FCRA Violations: BAAF’s Compliance Standards Established

Date: Dec 20, 2003
Affirmation of Summary Judgment in FCRA Violations: BAAF’s Compliance Standards Established Introduction The case of Ausherman et al. v. Bank of America Corporation et al. adjudicated by the United...
Affirmation of HECK v. HUMPHREY: Limiting §1983 Claims Tied to Undecided Convictions

Affirmation of HECK v. HUMPHREY: Limiting §1983 Claims Tied to Undecided Convictions

Date: Dec 18, 2003
Affirmation of HECK v. HUMPHREY: Limiting §1983 Claims Tied to Undecided Convictions Introduction In the case of Stanley M. Ballenger v. John Dale Owens, Lance Corporal and South Carolina State...
Reaffirming Federal Review Standards in Habeas Corpus Petitions: Wilson v. Ozmint

Reaffirming Federal Review Standards in Habeas Corpus Petitions: Wilson v. Ozmint

Date: Dec 18, 2003
Reaffirming Federal Review Standards in Habeas Corpus Petitions: Wilson v. Ozmint Introduction The case of James W. Wilson v. Jon E. Ozmint et al., adjudicated by the United States Court of Appeals...
Overbreadth in School Dress Codes: The Newsom Precedent

Overbreadth in School Dress Codes: The Newsom Precedent

Date: Dec 2, 2003
Overbreadth in School Dress Codes: The Newsom Precedent Introduction In the landmark case of Alan Newsom v. Albemarle County School Board, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit...
Affirmation of Effective Assistance of Counsel under Strickland: Tucker v. Ozmint

Affirmation of Effective Assistance of Counsel under Strickland: Tucker v. Ozmint

Date: Dec 2, 2003
Affirmation of Effective Assistance of Counsel under Strickland: Tucker v. Ozmint 1. Introduction Tucker v. Ozmint, 350 F.3d 433 (4th Cir. 2003), is a pivotal case addressing the standards for...
Deliberate Indifference in Correctional Settings: Fourth Circuit Establishes New Eighth Amendment Standard

Deliberate Indifference in Correctional Settings: Fourth Circuit Establishes New Eighth Amendment Standard

Date: Nov 20, 2003
Deliberate Indifference in Correctional Settings: Fourth Circuit Establishes New Eighth Amendment Standard Introduction The case of Clinton W. Odom v. South Carolina Department of Corrections...
Bailey v. Kennedy: Clarifying Qualified Immunity in Police Seizure and Use of Force Cases

Bailey v. Kennedy: Clarifying Qualified Immunity in Police Seizure and Use of Force Cases

Date: Nov 18, 2003
Bailey v. Kennedy: Clarifying Qualified Immunity in Police Seizure and Use of Force Cases Introduction In the landmark case of Michael Bailey; Jane Bailey; Billy Bailey v. D.H. Kennedy; D.B. Whitley;...
Reinforcing Standards for Withdrawing Guilty Pleas under Federal Rule 11: Insights from United States v. Bowman

Reinforcing Standards for Withdrawing Guilty Pleas under Federal Rule 11: Insights from United States v. Bowman

Date: Oct 31, 2003
Reinforcing Standards for Withdrawing Guilty Pleas under Federal Rule 11: Insights from United States v. Bowman Introduction United States v. Ronnie Bowman is a pivotal case adjudicated by the United...
Clarifying Class Certification Criteria under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23: Predominance and Superiority in Multi-Party Healthcare Plan Litigation

Clarifying Class Certification Criteria under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23: Predominance and Superiority in Multi-Party Healthcare Plan Litigation

Date: Oct 31, 2003
Clarifying Class Certification Criteria under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23: Predominance and Superiority in Multi-Party Healthcare Plan Litigation Introduction The case of Mary B. Gunnells et al. v. Healthplan...
Establishing Reasonableness of Attorney Fees under 42 U.S.C. §406(b)(1): Insights from Claypool v. Barnhart

Establishing Reasonableness of Attorney Fees under 42 U.S.C. §406(b)(1): Insights from Claypool v. Barnhart

Date: Oct 10, 2003
Establishing Reasonableness of Attorney Fees under 42 U.S.C. §406(b)(1): Insights from Claypool v. Barnhart Introduction The case of Nathan D. Claypool v. Jo Anne B. Barnhart addresses the critical...
Limiting Infringer’s Profit Attribution under 17 U.S.C. §504(b): Comprehensive Analysis of BOUCHAT v. BALTIMORE RAVENS

Limiting Infringer’s Profit Attribution under 17 U.S.C. §504(b): Comprehensive Analysis of BOUCHAT v. BALTIMORE RAVENS

Date: Oct 9, 2003
Limiting Infringer’s Profit Attribution under 17 U.S.C. §504(b): Comprehensive Analysis of BOUCHAT v. BALTIMORE RAVENS Introduction The case of Frederick E. BOUCHAT v. BALTIMORE RAVENS Football Club,...
Expanding Federal Kidnapping Jurisdiction: Unaccompanied Interstate Transportation Under 18 U.S.C. § 1201(a)(1) – United States v. Christopher Andaryl Wills

Expanding Federal Kidnapping Jurisdiction: Unaccompanied Interstate Transportation Under 18 U.S.C. § 1201(a)(1) – United States v. Christopher Andaryl Wills

Date: Oct 8, 2003
Expanding Federal Kidnapping Jurisdiction: Unaccompanied Interstate Transportation Under 18 U.S.C. § 1201(a)(1) – United States v. Christopher Andaryl Wills Introduction The case of United States of...
Enforcement of PLRA's Exhaustion Requirement in Federal Summary Judgment: Chase v. Peay

Enforcement of PLRA's Exhaustion Requirement in Federal Summary Judgment: Chase v. Peay

Date: Oct 1, 2003
Enforcement of PLRA's Exhaustion Requirement in Federal Summary Judgment: Chase v. Peay Introduction Warren Chase v. Phlonda Peay, et al., Civil Action No. CCB-98-2367, was adjudicated by the United...
Comprehensive Commentary on United States v. Charles William McHan: Expanding the Scope of Substitute Property Forfeiture

Comprehensive Commentary on United States v. Charles William McHan: Expanding the Scope of Substitute Property Forfeiture

Date: Sep 30, 2003
Expanding the Scope of Substitute Property Forfeiture: Insights from United States v. Charles William McHan Introduction United States of America v. Charles William McHan is a pivotal case...
Authority of Magistrate Judges in Rule 11 Proceedings and Limits on De Novo Review: Insights from United States v. Osborne

Authority of Magistrate Judges in Rule 11 Proceedings and Limits on De Novo Review: Insights from United States v. Osborne

Date: Sep 26, 2003
Authority of Magistrate Judges in Rule 11 Proceedings and Limits on De Novo Review: Insights from United States v. Osborne Introduction United States v. Betty Anne Osborne, 345 F.3d 281 (4th Cir....
Hobbs Act Robbery of Drug Dealer Constitutes Minimal Effect on Interstate Commerce: United States v. Williams

Hobbs Act Robbery of Drug Dealer Constitutes Minimal Effect on Interstate Commerce: United States v. Williams

Date: Aug 30, 2003
Hobbs Act Robbery of Drug Dealer Constitutes Minimal Effect on Interstate Commerce: United States v. Williams Introduction The case of United States of America v. Wesley Bernard Williams, adjudicated...
ROUSE v. LEE: Reinforcing AEDPA's Strict Time Limitations on Federal Habeas Petitions

ROUSE v. LEE: Reinforcing AEDPA's Strict Time Limitations on Federal Habeas Petitions

Date: Aug 12, 2003
ROUSE v. LEE: Reinforcing AEDPA's Strict Time Limitations on Federal Habeas Petitions Introduction The case of Kenneth Bernard Rouse v. R.C. Lee stands as a pivotal decision by the United States...
Complete Preemption Clarified: Sonoco Products Co. v. Physicians Health Plan, Inc.

Complete Preemption Clarified: Sonoco Products Co. v. Physicians Health Plan, Inc.

Date: Aug 1, 2003
Complete Preemption Clarified: Sonoco Products Co. v. Physicians Health Plan, Inc. Introduction The case of Sonoco Products Company v. Physicians Health Plan, Inc. underscores significant...
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