Log In
  • US
  • 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)
  • Supreme Court
  • High Courts
    All High Courts
    Allahabad High Court
    Andhra Pradesh High Court
    Bombay High Court
    Calcutta High Court
    Chhattisgarh High Court
    Delhi High Court
    Gauhati High Court
    Gujarat High Court
    Himachal Pradesh High Court
    Jammu and Kashmir High Court
    Jharkhand High Court
    Karnataka High Court
    Kerala High Court
    Madhya Pradesh High Court
    Madras High Court
    Manipur High Court
    Meghalaya High Court
    Orissa High Court
    Patna High Court
    Punjab & Haryana High Court
    Rajasthan High Court
    Sikkim High Court
    Telangana High Court
    Tripura High Court
    Uttarakhand High Court
Log In Sign Up India Judgments
  • US
  • 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

6th Circuit Case Commentaries

Sixth Circuit Reinforces Retaliation Standards under Title VII and KCRA in Ford v. General Motors

Sixth Circuit Reinforces Retaliation Standards under Title VII and KCRA in Ford v. General Motors

Date: Sep 28, 2002
Sixth Circuit Reinforces Retaliation Standards under Title VII and KCRA in Ford v. General Motors Introduction The case of George Ford and Mary A. Ford v. General Motors Corporation, decided by the...
Qualified Immunity Upholds Summary Judgment in Malicious Prosecution and Fourth Amendment Claims: Skousen v. Rambo

Qualified Immunity Upholds Summary Judgment in Malicious Prosecution and Fourth Amendment Claims: Skousen v. Rambo

Date: Sep 27, 2002
Qualified Immunity Upholds Summary Judgment in Malicious Prosecution and Fourth Amendment Claims: Skousen v. Rambo Introduction Skousen v. Rambo, 305 F.3d 520 (6th Cir. 2002), presents a pivotal...
Equitable Tolling in AEDPA Habeas Petitions: Miller v. Collins

Equitable Tolling in AEDPA Habeas Petitions: Miller v. Collins

Date: Sep 27, 2002
Equitable Tolling in AEDPA Habeas Petitions: Miller v. Collins Introduction Ralph Miller v. Terry Collins, Warden (305 F.3d 491) is a pivotal decision by the United States Court of Appeals for the...
Limiting Localized Travel and Association: Sixth Circuit Affirms Inconstitutionality of Cincinnati's Drug-Exclusion Ordinance

Limiting Localized Travel and Association: Sixth Circuit Affirms Inconstitutionality of Cincinnati's Drug-Exclusion Ordinance

Date: Sep 27, 2002
Limiting Localized Travel and Association: Sixth Circuit Affirms Inconstitutionality of Cincinnati's Drug-Exclusion Ordinance Introduction In the landmark case of Patricia Johnson; Michael Au France,...
Affirmation of Aiding and Abetting Convictions and the Requirement of Restitution Payment Schedules under the Mandatory Victims Restitution Act: United States v. Davis

Affirmation of Aiding and Abetting Convictions and the Requirement of Restitution Payment Schedules under the Mandatory Victims Restitution Act: United States v. Davis

Date: Sep 26, 2002
Affirmation of Aiding and Abetting Convictions and the Requirement of Restitution Payment Schedules under the Mandatory Victims Restitution Act: United States v. Davis Introduction In United States...
Prohibition of Amendment to Plead Exhaustion under the PLRA: Baxter v. Rose

Prohibition of Amendment to Plead Exhaustion under the PLRA: Baxter v. Rose

Date: Sep 26, 2002
Prohibition of Amendment to Plead Exhaustion under the PLRA: Baxter v. Rose Introduction In Alexander L. Baxter v. Rose et al., 305 F.3d 486 (6th Cir. 2002), the United States Court of Appeals for...
Enforcement of Statute of Limitations and the Absence of an Actual Innocence Exception in Federal Habeas Corpus Proceedings: Lardie v. Birkett

Enforcement of Statute of Limitations and the Absence of an Actual Innocence Exception in Federal Habeas Corpus Proceedings: Lardie v. Birkett

Date: Sep 21, 2002
Enforcement of Statute of Limitations and the Absence of an Actual Innocence Exception in Federal Habeas Corpus Proceedings: Lardie v. Birkett Introduction The case of Jash E. Lardie v. Thomas...
Appellate Ruling in U.S. v. Philip A. Chance: Affirmation and Reversal with Sentencing Implications

Appellate Ruling in U.S. v. Philip A. Chance: Affirmation and Reversal with Sentencing Implications

Date: Sep 20, 2002
Appellate Ruling in U.S. v. Philip A. Chance: Affirmation and Reversal with Sentencing Implications Introduction In United States of America v. Philip A. Chance, the United States Court of Appeals...
Affirmation of District Court's Decisions in FELA and Safety Appliance Act Case

Affirmation of District Court's Decisions in FELA and Safety Appliance Act Case

Date: Sep 19, 2002
Affirmation of District Court's Decisions in FELA and Safety Appliance Act Case Introduction In the case of William Toth, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Grand Trunk Railroad Company d/b/a CN North America,...
Pirelli's Fiduciary Breach: Extending ERISA Protections

Pirelli's Fiduciary Breach: Extending ERISA Protections

Date: Sep 18, 2002
Pirelli's Fiduciary Breach: Extending ERISA Protections Introduction The case of Clay K. James, et al. v. Pirelli Armstrong Tire Corporation (305 F.3d 439) presents a pivotal moment in the...
Affirmation of Drug Conspiracy Sentences and Apprendi Analysis in United States v. Stewart et al.

Affirmation of Drug Conspiracy Sentences and Apprendi Analysis in United States v. Stewart et al.

Date: Sep 11, 2002
Affirmation of Drug Conspiracy Sentences and Apprendi Analysis in United States v. Stewart et al. Introduction United States v. Stewart et al. is a pivotal case adjudicated by the United States Court...
Affirmation of Habeas Corpus Denial in Cortez Scott v. Warden: A Comprehensive Analysis of Legal Standards and Procedural Safeguards

Affirmation of Habeas Corpus Denial in Cortez Scott v. Warden: A Comprehensive Analysis of Legal Standards and Procedural Safeguards

Date: Sep 7, 2002
Affirmation of Habeas Corpus Denial in Cortez Scott v. Warden: A Comprehensive Analysis of Legal Standards and Procedural Safeguards Introduction The case of Cortez Scott v. Frank Elo, Warden,...
Voluntary Loss of Trademark Validates Franchise Termination under PMPA: Midwest Refining v. Armada Oil

Voluntary Loss of Trademark Validates Franchise Termination under PMPA: Midwest Refining v. Armada Oil

Date: Sep 6, 2002
Voluntary Loss of Trademark Validates Franchise Termination under PMPA: Midwest Refining v. Armada Oil Introduction The legal landscape governing franchise relationships within the petroleum industry...
ERISA Preemption and Postjudgment Interest in Caffey v. UNUM Life Insurance Co.

ERISA Preemption and Postjudgment Interest in Caffey v. UNUM Life Insurance Co.

Date: Sep 4, 2002
ERISA Preemption and Postjudgment Interest in Caffey v. UNUM Life Insurance Co. Introduction The case of Rosalyn Caffey v. UNUM Life Insurance Co. (302 F.3d 576) adjudicated by the United States...
Excusable Neglect Under Rule 60(b)(1): Insights from United States v. Acevedo

Excusable Neglect Under Rule 60(b)(1): Insights from United States v. Acevedo

Date: Aug 30, 2002
Excusable Neglect Under Rule 60(b)(1): Insights from United States v. Acevedo Introduction The case United States v. Juan Acevedo, adjudicated by the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth...
Affirming Procedural Bar on Brady and Severance Claims in Federal Habeas Corpus – Hutchison v. Bell

Affirming Procedural Bar on Brady and Severance Claims in Federal Habeas Corpus – Hutchison v. Bell

Date: Aug 30, 2002
Affirming Procedural Bar on Brady and Severance Claims in Federal Habeas Corpus – Hutchison v. Bell Introduction In Hutchison v. Bell, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit...
Privacy Act of 1974 Precludes Bivens Action for Retaliatory Creation of False Records: Analysis of Downie v. Wheat

Privacy Act of 1974 Precludes Bivens Action for Retaliatory Creation of False Records: Analysis of Downie v. Wheat

Date: Aug 24, 2002
Privacy Act of 1974 Precludes Bivens Action for Retaliatory Creation of False Records: Analysis of Downie v. Wheat Introduction In Downie v. Wheat, 301 F.3d 688 (6th Cir. 2002), the United States...
Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment Protections in Non-Judicial Evictions: Affirming Due Process and Unreasonable Seizures

Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment Protections in Non-Judicial Evictions: Affirming Due Process and Unreasonable Seizures

Date: Aug 24, 2002
Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment Protections in Non-Judicial Evictions: Affirming Due Process and Unreasonable Seizures Introduction In the case of Natasha Thomas; Susan Gibbs; and Edwina Lewis v. Ann...
Limitations on Third-Party Removal Under 28 U.S.C. § 1441: Insights from First National Bank of Pulaski v. Curry et al.

Limitations on Third-Party Removal Under 28 U.S.C. § 1441: Insights from First National Bank of Pulaski v. Curry et al.

Date: Aug 22, 2002
Limitations on Third-Party Removal Under 28 U.S.C. § 1441: Insights from First National Bank of Pulaski v. Curry et al. Introduction The case of First National Bank of Pulaski, Plaintiff, v. John T....
Reaffirming Consent Requirements and the Taint Doctrine in Vehicular Searches: United States v. Haynes

Reaffirming Consent Requirements and the Taint Doctrine in Vehicular Searches: United States v. Haynes

Date: Aug 17, 2002
Reaffirming Consent Requirements and the Taint Doctrine in Vehicular Searches: United States v. Haynes 1. Introduction United States of America v. Scott Lee Haynes (301 F.3d 669) is a pivotal...
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
  • Judgment Takedown Policy (India)
  • CaseMine API
  • CaseMine's Bespoke AI Solutions
  • Judge Signup
  • Student Signup

CaseMine Tools

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

© 2023 Gauge Data Solutions Pvt. Ltd.

Summary

Alert