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

Binding Arbitration Requires Client Consent: Insights from Blanton v. Womancare

Binding Arbitration Requires Client Consent: Insights from Blanton v. Womancare

Date: Mar 26, 1985
Binding Arbitration Requires Client Consent: Insights from Blanton v. Womancare Introduction Harriette Blanton v. Womancare, Inc., 38 Cal.3d 396 (1985), is a landmark decision by the Supreme Court of...
Administrative Overreach: DDS Spending Priorities Void under the Lanterman Act

Administrative Overreach: DDS Spending Priorities Void under the Lanterman Act

Date: Mar 22, 1985
Administrative Overreach: DDS Spending Priorities Void under the Lanterman Act Introduction The case of Association for Retarded Citizens — California et al. v. Department of Developmental Services...
Single Instance Accountability in Felony Drunk Driving: Wilkoff v. Superior Court of Orange County

Single Instance Accountability in Felony Drunk Driving: Wilkoff v. Superior Court of Orange County

Date: Mar 19, 1985
Single Instance Accountability in Felony Drunk Driving: Wilkoff v. Superior Court of Orange County Introduction Wilkoff v. Superior Court of Orange County is a landmark case decided by the Supreme...
Expansion of Privacy Protections: Broad Interpretation of Penal Code §631(a) Affirmed

Expansion of Privacy Protections: Broad Interpretation of Penal Code §631(a) Affirmed

Date: Mar 19, 1985
Expansion of Privacy Protections: Broad Interpretation of Penal Code §631(a) Affirmed Introduction In the landmark case Richard M. Ribas v. Joan Clark (38 Cal.3d 355), the Supreme Court of California...
Substantial Compliance Doctrine Affirmed in Asdourian v. Araj: Implications for Contractor Licensing and Contract Enforcement

Substantial Compliance Doctrine Affirmed in Asdourian v. Araj: Implications for Contractor Licensing and Contract Enforcement

Date: Mar 12, 1985
Substantial Compliance Doctrine Affirmed in Asdourian v. Araj: Implications for Contractor Licensing and Contract Enforcement Introduction Krikor Asdourian, a licensed contractor operating under the...
Enhancing Witness Credibility: The Castro Decision and the Role of Moral Turpitude in Admitting Prior Convictions

Enhancing Witness Credibility: The Castro Decision and the Role of Moral Turpitude in Admitting Prior Convictions

Date: Mar 12, 1985
Enhancing Witness Credibility: The Castro Decision and the Role of Moral Turpitude in Admitting Prior Convictions 1. Introduction In THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. MARIA J. CASTRO,...
California Supreme Court Establishes Right to Cash Benefits over In-Kind Welfare Assistance Requiring Residency

California Supreme Court Establishes Right to Cash Benefits over In-Kind Welfare Assistance Requiring Residency

Date: Mar 5, 1985
California Supreme Court Establishes Right to Cash Benefits over In-Kind Welfare Assistance Requiring Residency Introduction In the landmark case of Arthur Robbins et al. v. The Superior Court of...
Robert C. Elston v. City of Turlock: Application of Code of Civil Procedure §473 in Setting Aside Deemed Admissions due to Excusable Neglect

Robert C. Elston v. City of Turlock: Application of Code of Civil Procedure §473 in Setting Aside Deemed Admissions due to Excusable Neglect

Date: Mar 5, 1985
Robert C. Elston v. City of Turlock: Application of Code of Civil Procedure §473 in Setting Aside Deemed Admissions due to Excusable Neglect Introduction In Robert C. Elston et al. v. City of Turlock...
California Supreme Court Upholds MICRA's Limitations on Noneconomic Damages in Medical Malpractice Cases

California Supreme Court Upholds MICRA's Limitations on Noneconomic Damages in Medical Malpractice Cases

Date: Mar 1, 1985
California Supreme Court Upholds MICRA's Limitations on Noneconomic Damages in Medical Malpractice Cases Introduction The case of Lawrence Fein v. Permanente Medical Group (38 Cal.3d 137) represents...
Foreseeability in Landowner Liability: Insights from Isaacs v. Huntington Memorial Hospital

Foreseeability in Landowner Liability: Insights from Isaacs v. Huntington Memorial Hospital

Date: Mar 1, 1985
Foreseeability in Landowner Liability: Insights from Isaacs v. Huntington Memorial Hospital Introduction Isaacs v. Huntington Memorial Hospital, 38 Cal.3d 112 (1985), is a seminal case in California...
Safeguarding Against Prejudicial Hearsay: Insights from People v. Coleman

Safeguarding Against Prejudicial Hearsay: Insights from People v. Coleman

Date: Feb 26, 1985
Safeguarding Against Prejudicial Hearsay: Insights from People v. Coleman Introduction In the landmark case The People, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Ralph Terry Coleman, Defendant and Appellant (38...
Flexibility in Summary Judgment Procedures and Expert Witness Qualifications Affirmed in Zelvern Mann v. Cracchiolo

Flexibility in Summary Judgment Procedures and Expert Witness Qualifications Affirmed in Zelvern Mann v. Cracchiolo

Date: Feb 20, 1985
Flexibility in Summary Judgment Procedures and Expert Witness Qualifications Affirmed in Zelvern Mann v. Cracchiolo Introduction Zelvern W. Mann, as Administrator, etc., et al., Plaintiffs and...
Abrogation of California's Exclusionary Rules by Proposition 8: A Comprehensive Analysis of In re Lance W.

Abrogation of California's Exclusionary Rules by Proposition 8: A Comprehensive Analysis of In re Lance W.

Date: Feb 2, 1985
Abrogation of California's Exclusionary Rules by Proposition 8: A Comprehensive Analysis of In re Lance W. Introduction In re Lance W. is a landmark decision by the Supreme Court of California,...
Attorney's Fees Recoverable in Tortious Insurance Practices: ALBERT BRANDT v. Standard Insurance Company

Attorney's Fees Recoverable in Tortious Insurance Practices: ALBERT BRANDT v. Standard Insurance Company

Date: Jan 29, 1985
Attorney's Fees Recoverable in Tortious Insurance Practices: ALBERT BRANDT v. Standard Insurance Company Introduction The case of Albert Brandt v. The Superior Court of San Diego County; Standard...
Clarifying Serious Felony Enhancements for Residential Burglary in People v. Jackson

Clarifying Serious Felony Enhancements for Residential Burglary in People v. Jackson

Date: Jan 29, 1985
Clarifying Serious Felony Enhancements for Residential Burglary in People v. Jackson Introduction People v. Jackson is a seminal case heard by the Supreme Court of California on January 28, 1985. The...
Preservation of Use Immunity in Juvenile Fitness Hearings Post Proposition 8

Preservation of Use Immunity in Juvenile Fitness Hearings Post Proposition 8

Date: Jan 29, 1985
Preservation of Use Immunity in Juvenile Fitness Hearings Post Proposition 8 Introduction In the landmark case of Ramona R. v. The Superior Court of Los Angeles County, the Supreme Court of...
People v. Courts: Upholding the Defendant’s Right to Chosen Counsel and Continuance

People v. Courts: Upholding the Defendant’s Right to Chosen Counsel and Continuance

Date: Jan 25, 1985
People v. Courts: Upholding the Defendant’s Right to Chosen Counsel and Continuance Introduction In the landmark case People v. Philip Courts (37 Cal.3d 784, 1985), the Supreme Court of California...
Reimbursement for Community Contributions to Education in Marital Dissolution

Reimbursement for Community Contributions to Education in Marital Dissolution

Date: Jan 1, 1985
Reimbursement for Community Contributions to Education in Marital Dissolution Introduction The landmark case of In re the Marriage of Janet Linnea and Mark Jaye Sullivan (37 Cal.3d 762) addressed the...
Advisory Counsel in Capital Cases: Insights from People v. Bigelow (1984)

Advisory Counsel in Capital Cases: Insights from People v. Bigelow (1984)

Date: Dec 28, 1984
Advisory Counsel in Capital Cases: Insights from People v. Bigelow (1984) Introduction Case Title: The People, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Jerry Douglas Bigelow, Defendant and Appellant (37 Cal.3d...
Balancing Police Powers and Antitrust Principles: Supreme Court of California Upholds Berkeley's Rent Control Ordinance

Balancing Police Powers and Antitrust Principles: Supreme Court of California Upholds Berkeley's Rent Control Ordinance

Date: Dec 28, 1984
Balancing Police Powers and Antitrust Principles: Supreme Court of California Upholds Berkeley's Rent Control Ordinance Introduction In the landmark case of ALEXANDRA FISHER et al. v. CITY 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