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

6th Circuit Case Commentaries

Strict Compliance with Sentencing Rule 32(c)(1) Reinforced: United States v. Monus

Strict Compliance with Sentencing Rule 32(c)(1) Reinforced: United States v. Monus

Date: Oct 22, 1997
Strict Compliance with Sentencing Rule 32(c)(1) Reinforced: United States v. Monus Introduction United States of America v. Michael I. Monus is a significant case adjudicated by the United States...
Reaffirming Residual Functional Capacity Standards in Social Security Disability Law: The Walters v. Commissioner Decision

Reaffirming Residual Functional Capacity Standards in Social Security Disability Law: The Walters v. Commissioner Decision

Date: Oct 16, 1997
Reaffirming Residual Functional Capacity Standards in Social Security Disability Law: The Walters v. Commissioner Decision Introduction The case of Clarence Walters v. Commissioner of Social...
Clarifying the Permissive Pretext Inference Standard in Employment Discrimination Cases: Kline v. TVA

Clarifying the Permissive Pretext Inference Standard in Employment Discrimination Cases: Kline v. TVA

Date: Oct 16, 1997
Clarifying the Permissive Pretext Inference Standard in Employment Discrimination Cases: Kline v. TVA Introduction In the landmark case of Charles A. Kline v. Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA), the...
Tinker v. Sears: Establishing Precedence in Age Discrimination and Pretextual Terminations

Tinker v. Sears: Establishing Precedence in Age Discrimination and Pretextual Terminations

Date: Oct 15, 1997
Tinker v. Sears: Establishing Precedence in Age Discrimination and Pretextual Terminations Introduction In the landmark case Robert Tinker v. Sears, Roebuck Co., 127 F.3d 519 (6th Cir. 1997), the...
Clarifying Substantive Due Process and Equal Protection Claims Against Individual Police Officers in Sixth Circuit

Clarifying Substantive Due Process and Equal Protection Claims Against Individual Police Officers in Sixth Circuit

Date: Oct 9, 1997
Clarifying Substantive Due Process and Equal Protection Claims Against Individual Police Officers in Sixth Circuit Introduction The United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit delivered a...
Affirmation of the 100:1 Crack-to-Powder Cocaine Ratio Under Sentencing Guidelines Upheld

Affirmation of the 100:1 Crack-to-Powder Cocaine Ratio Under Sentencing Guidelines Upheld

Date: Oct 9, 1997
Affirmation of the 100:1 Crack-to-Powder Cocaine Ratio Under Sentencing Guidelines Upheld Introduction In the landmark case of United States of America v. Errol Eugene Washington, 127 F.3d 510 (6th...
Claim Preclusion in Federal Title VII Claims: Analysis of Heyliger v. State University

Claim Preclusion in Federal Title VII Claims: Analysis of Heyliger v. State University

Date: Oct 4, 1997
Claim Preclusion in Federal Title VII Claims: Analysis of Heyliger v. State University Introduction In the case of Wilton E. Heyliger v. State University and Community College System of Tennessee,...
Comprehensive Commentary on Austin v. Warden Bell: Affirmation of Effective Counsel during Liability Phase and Remand for Sentencing

Comprehensive Commentary on Austin v. Warden Bell: Affirmation of Effective Counsel during Liability Phase and Remand for Sentencing

Date: Oct 3, 1997
Affirmation of Effective Counsel during Liability Phase and Remand for Sentencing in Austin v. Warden Bell Introduction Austin v. Warden Bell, 126 F.3d 843 (6th Cir. 1997), is a pivotal case...
Reaffirming Qualified and Judicial Immunity in Civil Rights Litigation: McPherson v. Kelsey et al.

Reaffirming Qualified and Judicial Immunity in Civil Rights Litigation: McPherson v. Kelsey et al.

Date: Oct 2, 1997
Reaffirming Qualified and Judicial Immunity in Civil Rights Litigation: McPherson v. Kelsey et al. Introduction In McPherson v. Kelsey et al., the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit...
Res Judicata in Social Security Disability Claims: The Drummond Decision

Res Judicata in Social Security Disability Claims: The Drummond Decision

Date: Oct 1, 1997
Res Judicata in Social Security Disability Claims: The Drummond Decision Introduction The case of Grace Drummond v. Commissioner of Social Security (126 F.3d 837) presents a pivotal examination of...
Commitment Fee Recovery in Bankruptcy: Independence Doctrine and Estate Property under Ohio Law – In Re Graham Square, Inc.

Commitment Fee Recovery in Bankruptcy: Independence Doctrine and Estate Property under Ohio Law – In Re Graham Square, Inc.

Date: Sep 27, 1997
Commitment Fee Recovery in Bankruptcy: Independence Doctrine and Estate Property under Ohio Law – In Re Graham Square, Inc. Introduction The case In Re: Graham Square, Inc., Debtor. Michael Demczyk,...
Administrative Expense Priority for Post-Petition Pension Funding Claims: Insights from In Re: Sunarhauserman, Inc. and Hauserman, Inc.

Administrative Expense Priority for Post-Petition Pension Funding Claims: Insights from In Re: Sunarhauserman, Inc. and Hauserman, Inc.

Date: Sep 26, 1997
Administrative Expense Priority for Post-Petition Pension Funding Claims: Insights from In Re: Sunarhauserman, Inc. and Hauserman, Inc. Introduction The case of In Re: Sunarhauserman, Inc. and...
Res Judicata and ADA Claims: Insights from Hapgood v. City of Warren

Res Judicata and ADA Claims: Insights from Hapgood v. City of Warren

Date: Sep 26, 1997
Res Judicata and ADA Claims: Insights from Hapgood v. City of Warren Introduction John H. Hapgood v. City of Warren, 127 F.3d 490 (6th Cir. 1997), is a pivotal case that explores the intersection of...
Clarifying Section 851(a)(1) Notice Requirements for Sentence Enhancements: Sixth Circuit's Landmark Decision in United States v. King

Clarifying Section 851(a)(1) Notice Requirements for Sentence Enhancements: Sixth Circuit's Landmark Decision in United States v. King

Date: Sep 26, 1997
Clarifying Section 851(a)(1) Notice Requirements for Sentence Enhancements: Sixth Circuit's Landmark Decision in United States v. King Introduction The case of United States v. King (127 F.3d 483,...
Facilitating General Negligence Claims through Liberal Leave to Amend: Analysis of Fisher v. Roberts (6th Cir. 1997)

Facilitating General Negligence Claims through Liberal Leave to Amend: Analysis of Fisher v. Roberts (6th Cir. 1997)

Date: Sep 19, 1997
Facilitating General Negligence Claims through Liberal Leave to Amend: Analysis of Fisher v. Roberts (6th Cir. 1997) Introduction Fisher v. Roberts, 125 F.3d 974 (6th Cir. 1997), is a pivotal case...
Affirmation of Double Jeopardy Protection in Harpster v. State of Ohio

Affirmation of Double Jeopardy Protection in Harpster v. State of Ohio

Date: Sep 19, 1997
Affirmation of Double Jeopardy Protection in Harpster v. State of Ohio Introduction Donald Ray Harpster v. State of Ohio, 128 F.3d 322 (6th Cir. 1997), presents a pivotal examination of the Double...
Affirmation of Exclusive Jurisdiction of the Court of Veterans Appeals in VA Benefits Claims under APA Sovereign Immunity

Affirmation of Exclusive Jurisdiction of the Court of Veterans Appeals in VA Benefits Claims under APA Sovereign Immunity

Date: Sep 19, 1997
Affirmation of Exclusive Jurisdiction of the Court of Veterans Appeals in VA Benefits Claims under APA Sovereign Immunity Introduction The case of James Beamon; Charles Boyd; Cecil Holbrook v. Jesse...
Private Fiduciary Breach and Mail Fraud: Comprehensive Analysis of United States v. Frost et al.

Private Fiduciary Breach and Mail Fraud: Comprehensive Analysis of United States v. Frost et al.

Date: Sep 13, 1997
Private Fiduciary Breach and Mail Fraud: Comprehensive Analysis of United States v. Frost et al. Introduction In the landmark case of United States v. Frost et al. (125 F.3d 346, 6th Cir. 1997), the...
Affirmation of Judicial Immunity and Standing Limitations in Child Support Enforcement: Johnson v. Turner et al.

Affirmation of Judicial Immunity and Standing Limitations in Child Support Enforcement: Johnson v. Turner et al.

Date: Sep 9, 1997
Affirmation of Judicial Immunity and Standing Limitations in Child Support Enforcement: Johnson v. Turner et al. Introduction In the landmark case of Johnson v. Turner et al., the United States Court...
Affirmation of Defendant's Voluntary Waiver of Testimonial Rights in Neuman v. Rivers

Affirmation of Defendant's Voluntary Waiver of Testimonial Rights in Neuman v. Rivers

Date: Sep 5, 1997
Affirmation of Defendant's Voluntary Waiver of Testimonial Rights in Neuman v. Rivers Introduction David Neuman v. Jessie Rivers, 125 F.3d 315 (6th Cir. 1997), presents a multifaceted examination of...
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