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

Reinforcing the Predatory Act Requirement: California's SVPA Commitments Under Scrutiny

Reinforcing the Predatory Act Requirement: California's SVPA Commitments Under Scrutiny

Date: Aug 23, 2002
Reinforcing the Predatory Act Requirement: California's SVPA Commitments Under Scrutiny Introduction In the landmark case of The People v. Richard Hurtado (28 Cal.4th 1179, 2002), the California...
Expanding Vicarious Liability under Penal Code Section 12022.53: The CATHE PEOPLE v. ARTURO GARCIA Decision

Expanding Vicarious Liability under Penal Code Section 12022.53: The CATHE PEOPLE v. ARTURO GARCIA Decision

Date: Aug 23, 2002
Expanding Vicarious Liability under Penal Code Section 12022.53: The CATHE PEOPLE v. ARTURO GARCIA Decision Introduction The case of CATHE PEOPLE v. ARTURO GARCIA revolves around the application of...
Reaffirmation of the Duran Standard: Use of Remote-Controlled Stun Belts in Courtrooms

Reaffirmation of the Duran Standard: Use of Remote-Controlled Stun Belts in Courtrooms

Date: Aug 23, 2002
Reaffirmation of the Duran Standard: Use of Remote-Controlled Stun Belts in Courtrooms Introduction In the landmark case The People v. James Allen Mar, the Supreme Court of California grappled with...
Waiver of Custody Credits under Penal Code Section 2900.5: Insights from The PEOPLE v. JOHNSON

Waiver of Custody Credits under Penal Code Section 2900.5: Insights from The PEOPLE v. JOHNSON

Date: Aug 20, 2002
Waiver of Custody Credits under Penal Code Section 2900.5: Insights from The PEOPLE v. JOHNSON Introduction The People v. Dale Howard Johnson (28 Cal.4th 1050, 2002) is a pivotal case in California's...
Establishing Rights Under Lost Insurance Policies: Comprehensive Analysis of Dart Industries v. Commercial Union Insurance

Establishing Rights Under Lost Insurance Policies: Comprehensive Analysis of Dart Industries v. Commercial Union Insurance

Date: Aug 20, 2002
Establishing Rights Under Lost Insurance Policies: Comprehensive Analysis of DART INDUSTRIES, INC. v. COMMERCIAL UNION INSurance Company Introduction DART INDUSTRIES, INC. v. COMMERCIAL UNION...
Clarifying the Break-in-Custody Exception to the Edwards No-Recontact Rule: PEOPLE v. STORM

Clarifying the Break-in-Custody Exception to the Edwards No-Recontact Rule: PEOPLE v. STORM

Date: Aug 16, 2002
Clarifying the Break-in-Custody Exception to the Edwards No-Recontact Rule: PEOPLE v. STORM Introduction People v. Charles Edward Storm, 28 Cal.4th 1007 (2002), is a landmark decision by the Supreme...
Gutierrez v. The People (2002): Affirmation of Capital Murder Conviction and Application of Felony Murder and Special Circumstance Principles

Gutierrez v. The People (2002): Affirmation of Capital Murder Conviction and Application of Felony Murder and Special Circumstance Principles

Date: Aug 16, 2002
Gutierrez v. The People (2002): Affirmation of Capital Murder Conviction and Application of Felony Murder and Special Circumstance Principles Introduction Gutierrez v. The People is a landmark case...
Interplay of the Three Strikes and One Strike Laws: Comprehensive Analysis of PEOPLE v. ACOSTA

Interplay of the Three Strikes and One Strike Laws: Comprehensive Analysis of PEOPLE v. ACOSTA

Date: Aug 16, 2002
Interplay of the Three Strikes and One Strike Laws: Comprehensive Analysis of PEOPLE v. ACOSTA Introduction In the landmark case PEOPLE v. ACOSTA (2002), the Supreme Court of California addressed the...
Defining "Relative" in Child Molestation Sentencing: Insights from The People v. James Bert Wutzke

Defining "Relative" in Child Molestation Sentencing: Insights from The People v. James Bert Wutzke

Date: Aug 13, 2002
Defining "Relative" in Child Molestation Sentencing: Insights from The People v. James Bert Wutzke Introduction The People v. James Bert Wutzke (28 Cal.4th 923) is a landmark decision by the Supreme...
Evaluating Peremptory Challenges in Capital Cases: People v. McDermott

Evaluating Peremptory Challenges in Capital Cases: People v. McDermott

Date: Aug 13, 2002
Evaluating Peremptory Challenges in Capital Cases: People v. McDermott Introduction People v. McDermott is a landmark decision rendered by the Supreme Court of California on August 12, 2002. The case...
Appealability of Post-Judgment Motions to Vacate under Penal Code 1016.5: People v. Totari

Appealability of Post-Judgment Motions to Vacate under Penal Code 1016.5: People v. Totari

Date: Aug 9, 2002
Appealability of Post-Judgment Motions to Vacate under Penal Code 1016.5: People v. Totari Introduction In People v. Zuheir Anis Totari, 28 Cal.4th 876 (2002), the Supreme Court of California...
Res Judicata and Declaratory Judgments: Insights from Mycogen Corp. v. Monsanto Co.

Res Judicata and Declaratory Judgments: Insights from Mycogen Corp. v. Monsanto Co.

Date: Aug 9, 2002
Res Judicata and Declaratory Judgments: Insights from Mycogen Corp. v. Monsanto Co. Introduction Mycogen Corporation et al., Plaintiffs and Appellants v. Monsanto Company, Defendant and Respondent is...
Myers v. Philip Morris: Repeal Statute and Its Implications on Tobacco Liability

Myers v. Philip Morris: Repeal Statute and Its Implications on Tobacco Liability

Date: Aug 6, 2002
Myers v. Philip Morris: Repeal Statute and Its Implications on Tobacco Liability 28 Cal.4th 828, Supreme Court of California, August 5, 2002 Introduction Myers v. Philip Morris Companies, Inc. is a...
Probable Cause Established by Denial of Anti-SLAPP Motion: WILSON v. PARKER

Probable Cause Established by Denial of Anti-SLAPP Motion: WILSON v. PARKER

Date: Aug 2, 2002
Probable Cause Established by Denial of Anti-SLAPP Motion: WILSON v. PARKER Introduction The case of Raul Wilson et al. v. Parker, Covert Chidester et al. (28 Cal.4th 811, 2002) presents a pivotal...
Duress Defense Excluded in California Murder Cases: Analysis of PEOPLE v. ANDERSON

Duress Defense Excluded in California Murder Cases: Analysis of PEOPLE v. ANDERSON

Date: Jul 30, 2002
Duress Defense Excluded in California Murder Cases: Analysis of PEOPLE v. ANDERSON Introduction Case: The People, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Robert Neal Anderson, Defendant and Appellant. Court:...
Impact of Prejudicial Error in Death Qualification Voir Dire: A Commentary on People v. Randall Scott Cash (28 Cal.4th 703)

Impact of Prejudicial Error in Death Qualification Voir Dire: A Commentary on People v. Randall Scott Cash (28 Cal.4th 703)

Date: Jul 26, 2002
Impact of Prejudicial Error in Death Qualification Voir Dire: A Commentary on People v. Randall Scott Cash (28 Cal.4th 703) Introduction In the landmark case of People v. Randall Scott Cash,...
Authorized Appellate Review of Misdemeanor Sentencing in Wobbler Offenses Established in PEOPLE v. STATUM

Authorized Appellate Review of Misdemeanor Sentencing in Wobbler Offenses Established in PEOPLE v. STATUM

Date: Jul 26, 2002
Authorized Appellate Review of Misdemeanor Sentencing in Wobbler Offenses Established in PEOPLE v. STATUM Introduction In The People v. Russell Hubert Statum (2002) 28 Cal.4th 682, the Supreme Court...
Balancing Attorney-Client and Psychotherapist-Patient Privileges in Confrontation Rights: People v. Gurule

Balancing Attorney-Client and Psychotherapist-Patient Privileges in Confrontation Rights: People v. Gurule

Date: Jul 23, 2002
Balancing Attorney-Client and Psychotherapist-Patient Privileges in Confrontation Rights: People v. Gurule Introduction The Supreme Court of California, in the landmark case of The People, Plaintiff...
Limitations on Jury Instructions: Reining in CALJIC No. 17.41.1

Limitations on Jury Instructions: Reining in CALJIC No. 17.41.1

Date: Jul 19, 2002
Limitations on Jury Instructions: Reining in CALJIC No. 17.41.1 Introduction In the landmark case of The People v. Tye John Engelman, the Supreme Court of California addressed the contentious issue...
Limited Immunity Under Proposition 215: Insights from PEOPLE v. MOWER

Limited Immunity Under Proposition 215: Insights from PEOPLE v. MOWER

Date: Jul 19, 2002
Limited Immunity Under Proposition 215: Insights from PEOPLE v. MOWER Introduction The case of People v. Myron Carlyle Mower (28 Cal.4th 457) represents a pivotal moment in California's legal...
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