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

California Case Commentaries

Proposition 8 Abrogates Disbrow: Implications for the Use of Miranda-Violative Statements in Impeachment

Proposition 8 Abrogates Disbrow: Implications for the Use of Miranda-Violative Statements in Impeachment

Date: Feb 2, 1988
Proposition 8 Abrogates Disbrow: Implications for the Use of Miranda-Violative Statements in Impeachment Introduction In the landmark case The People v. Michael Dennis May (44 Cal.3d 309, 1988), the...
Secure Detention of Contemptuous Status Offenders: Insights from In re Michael G.

Secure Detention of Contemptuous Status Offenders: Insights from In re Michael G.

Date: Jan 26, 1988
Secure Detention of Contemptuous Status Offenders: Insights from In re Michael G. Introduction In re Michael G., a Minor, on Habeas Corpus (44 Cal.3d 283, 1988) is a pivotal judgment from the Supreme...
Preemptory Challenge Misuse in Jury Selection: People v. Snow (1987)

Preemptory Challenge Misuse in Jury Selection: People v. Snow (1987)

Date: Dec 25, 1987
Preemptory Challenge Misuse in Jury Selection: People v. Snow (1987) Introduction People v. Prentice Juan Snow, 44 Cal.3d 216 (1987), is a landmark Supreme Court of California decision addressing the...
Establishing the Limits of Dual Representation: People v. Miranda

Establishing the Limits of Dual Representation: People v. Miranda

Date: Nov 13, 1987
Establishing the Limits of Dual Representation: People v. Miranda Introduction Case: The People, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Adam Miranda, Defendant and Appellant Court: Supreme Court of California...
Martín v. People: Enhancing Protections Against Prosecutorial Misconduct in Habeas Corpus Proceedings

Martín v. People: Enhancing Protections Against Prosecutorial Misconduct in Habeas Corpus Proceedings

Date: Nov 10, 1987
Martín v. People: Enhancing Protections Against Prosecutorial Misconduct in Habeas Corpus Proceedings Introduction In re Herman G. Martin on Habeas Corpus (44 Cal.3d 1, 1987) represents a pivotal...
Limitations on Punitive Damages Under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act: DYNA-MED v. Fair Employment and Housing Commission

Limitations on Punitive Damages Under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act: DYNA-MED v. Fair Employment and Housing Commission

Date: Nov 3, 1987
Limitations on Punitive Damages Under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act DYNA-MED, Inc. v. Fair Employment and Housing Commission (43 Cal.3d 1379) Court: Supreme Court of California Date:...
Retained Jurisdiction to Award Attorney Fees under CCP §1021.5 Despite Dismissal under §583(b): Maria P. v. Wilson Riles

Retained Jurisdiction to Award Attorney Fees under CCP §1021.5 Despite Dismissal under §583(b): Maria P. v. Wilson Riles

Date: Oct 30, 1987
Retained Jurisdiction to Award Attorney Fees under CCP §1021.5 Despite Dismissal under §583(b): Maria P. v. Wilson Riles Introduction In the landmark case of Maria P., et al. v. Wilson Riles, et al.,...
California Supreme Court Upholds Sobriety Checkpoints: A New Administrative Search Precedent

California Supreme Court Upholds Sobriety Checkpoints: A New Administrative Search Precedent

Date: Oct 30, 1987
California Supreme Court Upholds Sobriety Checkpoints: A New Administrative Search Precedent Introduction In the landmark case of WILLIAM INGERSOLL et al. v. ALFRED PALMER (43 Cal.3d 1321, 1987), the...
Private Insurance Decisions Separate from State Action: Analyzing King v. Meese

Private Insurance Decisions Separate from State Action: Analyzing King v. Meese

Date: Oct 27, 1987
Private Insurance Decisions Separate from State Action: Analyzing King v. Meese Introduction In the landmark case of M.L. King et al. v. George Meese et al., the Supreme Court of California...
Enhancing Jury Discretion in Capital Sentencing: Analysis of People v. Gates (1987)

Enhancing Jury Discretion in Capital Sentencing: Analysis of People v. Gates (1987)

Date: Oct 16, 1987
Enhancing Jury Discretion in Capital Sentencing: Analysis of People v. Gates (1987) Introduction In the landmark case of People v. Gates, decided on October 15, 1987, the Supreme Court of California...
Intent to Kill Not Required for Felony-Murder Special Circumstances in PEOPLE v. ANDERSON

Intent to Kill Not Required for Felony-Murder Special Circumstances in PEOPLE v. ANDERSON

Date: Oct 14, 1987
Intent to Kill Not Required for Felony-Murder Special Circumstances in PEOPLE v. ANDERSON Introduction People v. James Phillip Anderson is a landmark case decided by the Supreme Court of California...
Interpreting 'Convicted' in Section 1732.5: The People v. Woodhead Establishes Current Conviction Limitation for Youth Authority Commitment

Interpreting 'Convicted' in Section 1732.5: The People v. Woodhead Establishes Current Conviction Limitation for Youth Authority Commitment

Date: Sep 9, 1987
Interpreting 'Convicted' in Section 1732.5: The People v. Woodhead Establishes Current Conviction Limitation for Youth Authority Commitment Introduction The People v. Michael Woodhead (43 Cal.3d...
Sliding Scale Recovery Agreements Must Align with Proportional Liability to be Considered Good Faith Settlements

Sliding Scale Recovery Agreements Must Align with Proportional Liability to be Considered Good Faith Settlements

Date: Sep 4, 1987
Sliding Scale Recovery Agreements Must Align with Proportional Liability to be Considered Good Faith Settlements Introduction The case of Abbott Ford, Inc. v. The Superior Court of Los Angeles County...
Ensuring Due Process in Manslaughter Charges: Supreme Court Upholds Involuntary Manslaughter Conviction in People v. Thomas

Ensuring Due Process in Manslaughter Charges: Supreme Court Upholds Involuntary Manslaughter Conviction in People v. Thomas

Date: Aug 28, 1987
Ensuring Due Process in Manslaughter Charges: Supreme Court Upholds Involuntary Manslaughter Conviction in People v. Thomas Introduction People v. Paul E. Thomas (43 Cal.3d 818) is a significant...
Limits on Discovery in Sexual Harassment Cases: Vinson v. Superior Court of Alameda County

Limits on Discovery in Sexual Harassment Cases: Vinson v. Superior Court of Alameda County

Date: Aug 28, 1987
Limits on Discovery in Sexual Harassment Cases: Vinson v. Superior Court of Alameda County Introduction Katherine Vinson v. The Superior Court of Alameda County, Peralta Community College District et...
The People v. David L. Ghent, Jr.: Affirmation of Death Penalty under 1977 California Law

The People v. David L. Ghent, Jr.: Affirmation of Death Penalty under 1977 California Law

Date: Aug 14, 1987
The People v. David L. Ghent, Jr.: Affirmation of Death Penalty under 1977 California Law Introduction The People v. David L. Ghent, Jr. is a landmark decision by the Supreme Court of California...
Reaffirming the Necessity of Specific Intent in Attempted Murder Charges

Reaffirming the Necessity of Specific Intent in Attempted Murder Charges

Date: Jul 17, 1987
Reaffirming the Necessity of Specific Intent in Attempted Murder Charges Introduction THE PEOPLE v. CHARLES JOSEPH LEE (43 Cal.3d 666, 1987) is a landmark decision by the Supreme Court of California...
Broad Waiver of Fourth Amendment Rights in Probation Conditions: Analysis of People v. Bravo (43 Cal.3d 600)

Broad Waiver of Fourth Amendment Rights in Probation Conditions: Analysis of People v. Bravo (43 Cal.3d 600)

Date: Jul 10, 1987
Broad Waiver of Fourth Amendment Rights in Probation Conditions: Analysis of People v. Bravo (43 Cal.3d 600) Introduction People v. Robert Terry Bravo is a landmark decision by the Supreme Court of...
Juror Re-convening Rules in Sanity Hearings for Capital Sentencing: THE PEOPLE v. HENDRICKS

Juror Re-convening Rules in Sanity Hearings for Capital Sentencing: THE PEOPLE v. HENDRICKS

Date: Jul 7, 1987
Juror Re-convening Rules in Sanity Hearings for Capital Sentencing: THE PEOPLE v. HENDRICKS Introduction THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. EDGAR M. HENDRICKS, Defendant and Appellant (43...
Speculative Nature of Loss Precludes Tort Claims in Horse Racing: Youst v. Longo (43 Cal.3d 64)

Speculative Nature of Loss Precludes Tort Claims in Horse Racing: Youst v. Longo (43 Cal.3d 64)

Date: Jan 3, 1987
Speculative Nature of Loss Precludes Tort Claims in Horse Racing: Youst v. Longo (43 Cal.3d 64) Introduction In Harlan Youst v. Gerald Longo (43 Cal.3d 64), the Supreme Court of California addressed...
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