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

Fourth Circuit Emphasizes Pain Consideration in Social Security Disability Evaluations

Fourth Circuit Emphasizes Pain Consideration in Social Security Disability Evaluations

Date: Oct 7, 1989
Fourth Circuit Emphasizes Pain Consideration in Social Security Disability Evaluations Introduction The case of Cleveland Hatcher v. Secretary, Department of Health and Human Services, 898 F.2d 21...
Abstention Doctrine Affirmed: Application of YOUNGER v. HARRIS in Cinema Blue v. Gilchrist

Abstention Doctrine Affirmed: Application of YOUNGER v. HARRIS in Cinema Blue v. Gilchrist

Date: Oct 6, 1989
Abstention Doctrine Affirmed: Application of YOUNGER v. HARRIS in Cinema Blue v. Gilchrist Introduction The case Cinema Blue of Charlotte, Incorporated; Jim St. John; Curtis Rene Peterson v. Peter S....
Meaningful Access to Courts for Inmates: Comprehensive Commentary on White v. White (4th Cir. 1989)

Meaningful Access to Courts for Inmates: Comprehensive Commentary on White v. White (4th Cir. 1989)

Date: Oct 4, 1989
Meaningful Access to Courts for Inmates: Comprehensive Commentary on White v. White (4th Cir. 1989) Introduction The case of Judson Warren White v. C.M. White, Warden; A.V. Dodrill, Commissioner of...
Establishing the Good Faith Filing Requirement in Chapter 11: Carolin Corp. v. Miller

Establishing the Good Faith Filing Requirement in Chapter 11: Carolin Corp. v. Miller

Date: Sep 29, 1989
Establishing the Good Faith Filing Requirement in Chapter 11: Carolin Corp. v. Miller Introduction The case of Carolin Corporation v. Robert J. Miller, Jr. (886 F.2d 693, 1989) presents a pivotal...
Enhancing RICO's Pattern Requirement: Insights from MENASCO, Inc. v. Wasserman

Enhancing RICO's Pattern Requirement: Insights from MENASCO, Inc. v. Wasserman

Date: Sep 29, 1989
Enhancing RICO's Pattern Requirement: Insights from MENASCO, Inc. v. Wasserman Introduction The case of Menasco, Inc.; Lucky Two, Inc. v. Barry M. Wasserman et al. (886 F.2d 681) adjudicated before...
Differential Good Time Credits in Incarceration: Upholding Rational Legislative Distinctions

Differential Good Time Credits in Incarceration: Upholding Rational Legislative Distinctions

Date: Sep 29, 1989
Differential Good Time Credits in Incarceration: Upholding Rational Legislative Distinctions Introduction The case of Lawrence Moss v. Jeffrey J. Clark et al. presents a pivotal examination of the...
Revisiting Personal Jurisdiction and RICO Claims: Insights from Combs v. Bakker

Revisiting Personal Jurisdiction and RICO Claims: Insights from Combs v. Bakker

Date: Sep 27, 1989
Revisiting Personal Jurisdiction and RICO Claims: Insights from Combs v. Bakker, 886 F.2d 673 Introduction The case of David T. Combs and Sarah E. Combs v. James O. Bakker, Tammy Faye Bakker, and...
Rafael Figeroa v. INS: Reinforcing Standards for Asylum Claims and Counsel Effectiveness

Rafael Figeroa v. INS: Reinforcing Standards for Asylum Claims and Counsel Effectiveness

Date: Sep 22, 1989
Rafael Figeroa v. INS: Reinforcing Standards for Asylum Claims and Counsel Effectiveness Introduction Rafael Figeroa-Leyva, also known as Rafael Najarro-Morales, a twenty-year-old citizen of El...
Reaffirmation of 'Minimum Contacts' Over 'Stream of Commerce' in Personal Jurisdiction: Federal Insurance Co. v. Lake Shore Inc. & Peterson Builders

Reaffirmation of 'Minimum Contacts' Over 'Stream of Commerce' in Personal Jurisdiction: Federal Insurance Co. v. Lake Shore Inc. & Peterson Builders

Date: Sep 21, 1989
Reaffirmation of 'Minimum Contacts' Over 'Stream of Commerce' in Personal Jurisdiction: Federal Insurance Co. v. Lake Shore Inc. & Peterson Builders Introduction In The Federal Insurance Company v....
Balancing Public Access and Criminal Investigation: A Comprehensive Analysis of In Re The Baltimore Sun Company v. Clarence E. Goetz

Balancing Public Access and Criminal Investigation: A Comprehensive Analysis of In Re The Baltimore Sun Company v. Clarence E. Goetz

Date: Sep 16, 1989
Balancing Public Access and Criminal Investigation: A Comprehensive Analysis of In Re The Baltimore Sun Company v. Clarence E. Goetz Introduction The case of In Re The Baltimore Sun Company v....
Rule 803(6) and Pretrial Stipulations in Defense Exhibit Admissibility: A Comprehensive Analysis of United States v. Saunders

Rule 803(6) and Pretrial Stipulations in Defense Exhibit Admissibility: A Comprehensive Analysis of United States v. Saunders

Date: Sep 15, 1989
Rule 803(6) and Pretrial Stipulations in Defense Exhibit Admissibility: A Comprehensive Analysis of United States v. Saunders Introduction The case of United States of America v. Carlos Saunders (886...
Actual Malice Required for Punitive Damages in Malicious Prosecution: Goodwin v. Metts

Actual Malice Required for Punitive Damages in Malicious Prosecution: Goodwin v. Metts

Date: Sep 13, 1989
Actual Malice Required for Punitive Damages in Malicious Prosecution: Goodwin v. Metts Introduction In the landmark case of Goodwin v. Metts, adjudicated by the United States Court of Appeals for the...
Clarifying § 1983 Standards: Summary Judgment Affirmed on Excessive Force Claims and Defendant Standing

Clarifying § 1983 Standards: Summary Judgment Affirmed on Excessive Force Claims and Defendant Standing

Date: Sep 13, 1989
Clarifying § 1983 Standards: Summary Judgment Affirmed on Excessive Force Claims and Defendant Standing Introduction In the case of Taft Brooks v. Pembroke City Jail, et al., adjudicated by the...
DeNobel v. Vitro Corporation: Establishing Standards for ERISA Benefit Determinations

DeNobel v. Vitro Corporation: Establishing Standards for ERISA Benefit Determinations

Date: Sep 6, 1989
DeNobel v. Vitro Corporation: Establishing Standards for ERISA Benefit Determinations Introduction In the landmark case of DeNobel v. Vitro Corporation, decided by the United States Court of Appeals...
Strict Application of I.R.C. §6511 in Tax Refund Claims: Insights from Glendenning v. United States

Strict Application of I.R.C. §6511 in Tax Refund Claims: Insights from Glendenning v. United States

Date: Sep 1, 1989
Strict Application of I.R.C. §6511 in Tax Refund Claims: Insights from Glendenning v. United States Introduction The case of Claire W. Glendenning Boryan et al. v. United States of America, decided...
Affirmation of Felon Firearm Possession and Mandatory Sentencing Under 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1) & 924(e)(1)

Affirmation of Felon Firearm Possession and Mandatory Sentencing Under 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1) & 924(e)(1)

Date: Aug 30, 1989
Affirmation of Felon Firearm Possession and Mandatory Sentencing Under 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1) & 924(e)(1) Introduction The case of United States of America v. Arthur Ronald Crittendon a/k/a Jabbar...
Affirmation of Non-Discriminatory Promotion and Wage Practices: Mallory and Byrd v. Booth Refrigeration Supply Co.

Affirmation of Non-Discriminatory Promotion and Wage Practices: Mallory and Byrd v. Booth Refrigeration Supply Co.

Date: Aug 24, 1989
Affirmation of Non-Discriminatory Promotion and Wage Practices: Mallory and Byrd v. Booth Refrigeration Supply Co. Introduction In the landmark case of Mallory and Byrd v. Booth Refrigeration Supply...
Fourth Circuit Clarifies Scope of Implied Warranty: Excludes Lost Resale Value Claims

Fourth Circuit Clarifies Scope of Implied Warranty: Excludes Lost Resale Value Claims

Date: Aug 23, 1989
Fourth Circuit Clarifies Scope of Implied Warranty: Excludes Lost Resale Value Claims Introduction In the landmark case of Mary A. Carlson et al. v. General Motors Corporation, the United States...
ERISA Preemption Clarified: Distinguishing State Law Claims in Employment Contract Disputes

ERISA Preemption Clarified: Distinguishing State Law Claims in Employment Contract Disputes

Date: Aug 22, 1989
ERISA Preemption Clarified: Distinguishing State Law Claims in Employment Contract Disputes Introduction The case of Lawrence Pizlo, et al. v. Bethlehem Steel Corporation (884 F.2d 116) adjudicated...
Procedural Default and Effective Assistance of Counsel: Insights from Smith v. State of South Carolina

Procedural Default and Effective Assistance of Counsel: Insights from Smith v. State of South Carolina

Date: Aug 22, 1989
Procedural Default and Effective Assistance of Counsel: Insights from Smith v. State of South Carolina Introduction Alton B. Smith v. State of South Carolina is a pivotal case decided by the United...
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