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

5th Circuit Case Commentaries

Establishing Precedent on Pregnancy Discrimination and Attorney's Fees under Title VII: Migis v. Pearle Vision, Inc.

Establishing Precedent on Pregnancy Discrimination and Attorney's Fees under Title VII: Migis v. Pearle Vision, Inc.

Date: Mar 11, 1998
Establishing Precedent on Pregnancy Discrimination and Attorney's Fees under Title VII: Migis v. Pearle Vision, Inc. Introduction In Migis v. Pearle Vision, Inc., 135 F.3d 1041 (5th Cir. 1998), the...
Cain v. United States Court of Appeals: Defining Successive Habeas Corpus Petitions under AEDPA

Cain v. United States Court of Appeals: Defining Successive Habeas Corpus Petitions under AEDPA

Date: Mar 6, 1998
Cain v. United States Court of Appeals: Defining Successive Habeas Corpus Petitions under AEDPA Introduction IN RE: SHANE McCLAINE CAIN, MOVANT. (137 F.3d 234) is a pivotal case decided by the United...
AEDPA Limitations Period: Flores v. United States - A New Precedent

AEDPA Limitations Period: Flores v. United States - A New Precedent

Date: Mar 6, 1998
AEDPA Limitations Period: Flores v. United States - A New Precedent Introduction In UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. ROMEO TRINIDAD FLORES, JR., the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit...
Fifth Circuit Reverses District Court, Classifying Specialized Workover Barge Rig 3 as Vessel under the Jones Act

Fifth Circuit Reverses District Court, Classifying Specialized Workover Barge Rig 3 as Vessel under the Jones Act

Date: Mar 3, 1998
Fifth Circuit Reverses District Court, Classifying Specialized Workover Barge Rig 3 as Vessel under the Jones Act Introduction In the case of Arabie J. Manuel v. P.A.W. Drilling Well Service, Inc.;...
Dyer v. United States: Reinforcing Coram Nobis Limitations Post-McNally

Dyer v. United States: Reinforcing Coram Nobis Limitations Post-McNally

Date: Feb 28, 1998
Dyer v. United States: Reinforcing Coram Nobis Limitations Post-McNally Introduction Dyer v. United States, 136 F.3d 417 (5th Cir. 1998), is a pivotal case addressing the stringent criteria for...
Establishing Objective Reasonableness in Qualified Immunity: Hare v. City of Corinth

Establishing Objective Reasonableness in Qualified Immunity: Hare v. City of Corinth

Date: Feb 13, 1998
Establishing Objective Reasonableness in Qualified Immunity: Hare v. City of Corinth Introduction Hare v. City of Corinth, et al. is a landmark decision by the United States Court of Appeals for the...
Clarifying the 'Otherwise Qualified' Standard Under the ADA: Analysis of Hypes v. First Commerce Corporation

Clarifying the 'Otherwise Qualified' Standard Under the ADA: Analysis of Hypes v. First Commerce Corporation

Date: Feb 13, 1998
Clarifying the 'Otherwise Qualified' Standard Under the ADA: Analysis of Hypes v. First Commerce Corporation Introduction The case of David L. Hypes v. First Commerce Corporation (FCC), decided by...
Qualified Immunity Affirmed in the Absence of Clearly Established Law: Sorenson v. Ferrie & Walling

Qualified Immunity Affirmed in the Absence of Clearly Established Law: Sorenson v. Ferrie & Walling

Date: Feb 12, 1998
Qualified Immunity Affirmed in the Absence of Clearly Established Law: Sorenson v. Ferrie & Walling Introduction Sorenson v. Ferrie & Walling is a significant appellate decision from the United...
Inclusion of Statutory Penalties in Diversity Jurisdiction: St. Paul Reinsurance Co. v. Greenberg

Inclusion of Statutory Penalties in Diversity Jurisdiction: St. Paul Reinsurance Co. v. Greenberg

Date: Feb 11, 1998
Inclusion of Statutory Penalties in Diversity Jurisdiction: St. Paul Reinsurance Co. v. Greenberg Introduction St. Paul Reinsurance Company, Ltd. v. Larry Greenberg, 134 F.3d 1250 (5th Cir. 1998), is...
Appropriate Medical Screening under EMTALA: Upholding Summary Judgment in Marshall v. East Carroll Parish Hospital

Appropriate Medical Screening under EMTALA: Upholding Summary Judgment in Marshall v. East Carroll Parish Hospital

Date: Feb 10, 1998
Appropriate Medical Screening under EMTALA: Upholding Summary Judgment in Marshall v. East Carroll Parish Hospital Introduction Marshall v. East Carroll Parish Hospital Service District is a pivotal...
Sexual Action Exclusion Eliminates Coverage for Vicarious Liability Claims: Analysis of American States Insurance Co. v. Bailey

Sexual Action Exclusion Eliminates Coverage for Vicarious Liability Claims: Analysis of American States Insurance Co. v. Bailey

Date: Jan 31, 1998
Sexual Action Exclusion Eliminates Coverage for Vicarious Liability Claims: Analysis of American States Insurance Co. v. Bailey Introduction The case of American States Insurance Company v. H. Barry...
Narvaiz v. Johnson: Affirmation of Sentencing Instructions under Texas Penal Code

Narvaiz v. Johnson: Affirmation of Sentencing Instructions under Texas Penal Code

Date: Jan 31, 1998
Narvaiz v. Johnson: Affirmation of Sentencing Instructions under Texas Penal Code Introduction The case Leopoldo Narvaiz, Jr., Petitioner-Appellant, v. Gary L. Johnson, Director, Texas Department of...
Strict Interpretation of 28 U.S.C. §1445(c): Fifth Circuit Prohibits Federal Court Removal of State Workers' Compensation Claims

Strict Interpretation of 28 U.S.C. §1445(c): Fifth Circuit Prohibits Federal Court Removal of State Workers' Compensation Claims

Date: Jan 28, 1998
Strict Interpretation of 28 U.S.C. §1445(c): Fifth Circuit Prohibits Federal Court Removal of State Workers' Compensation Claims Introduction In the landmark case of Rebecca Sherrod v. American...
Limits of Habeas Corpus Relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 in Sentencing and Ineffective Assistance of Counsel Claims

Limits of Habeas Corpus Relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 in Sentencing and Ineffective Assistance of Counsel Claims

Date: Jan 28, 1998
Limits of Habeas Corpus Relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 in Sentencing and Ineffective Assistance of Counsel Claims Introduction The case of United States of America v. Ludevina Ayala Cervantes, decided...
Establishing Standards for Sequestration Orders: In re Terra International, Inc.

Establishing Standards for Sequestration Orders: In re Terra International, Inc.

Date: Jan 27, 1998
Establishing Standards for Sequestration Orders: In re Terra International, Inc. (134 F.3d 302) Introduction In re Terra International, Inc., adjudicated by the United States Court of Appeals for the...
Affirmation of Magistrate Judge's Decision on Jury Trial Waiver and Evidentiary Rulings in McDonald v. Steward

Affirmation of Magistrate Judge's Decision on Jury Trial Waiver and Evidentiary Rulings in McDonald v. Steward

Date: Jan 27, 1998
Affirmation of Magistrate Judge's Decision on Jury Trial Waiver and Evidentiary Rulings in McDonald v. Steward Introduction The case of Willie Ray McDonald v. J. Steward, Library Supervisor, Michael...
Expanding the Definition of 'Official Act' in Public Bribery: Parker v. USA

Expanding the Definition of 'Official Act' in Public Bribery: Parker v. USA

Date: Jan 16, 1998
Expanding the Definition of 'Official Act' in Public Bribery: Parker v. USA Introduction United States of America v. Joann A. Parker; Ralph Parker is a pivotal case adjudicated by the United States...
Ineffective Assistance of Counsel and Fifth Amendment Protections in Goodwin v. Johnson

Ineffective Assistance of Counsel and Fifth Amendment Protections in Goodwin v. Johnson

Date: Jan 16, 1998
Ineffective Assistance of Counsel and Fifth Amendment Protections in Goodwin v. Johnson Introduction Goodwin v. Johnson (132 F.3d 162, 1998) is a significant appellate decision from the United States...
Enhancing Plaintiff’s Rights in Amending Defendants: Jacobsen v. Police Officer Osborne

Enhancing Plaintiff’s Rights in Amending Defendants: Jacobsen v. Police Officer Osborne

Date: Jan 16, 1998
Enhancing Plaintiff’s Rights in Amending Defendants: Jacobsen v. Police Officer Osborne Introduction In the landmark case Michael Jacobsen v. Police Officer Osborne, et al., 133 F.3d 315 (5th Cir....
Qualified Immunity Affirmed for Prison Officials Under Discretionary Duty in Newton v. Black

Qualified Immunity Affirmed for Prison Officials Under Discretionary Duty in Newton v. Black

Date: Jan 14, 1998
Qualified Immunity Affirmed for Prison Officials Under Discretionary Duty in Newton v. Black Introduction Parties Involved: Plaintiff-Appellee/Cross-Appellant: Jimmy Newton Defendants: Lee Roy Black,...
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