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

Comprehensive Commentary on People v. Juan Carlos Castenada: Defining Active Participation in Criminal Street Gangs

Comprehensive Commentary on People v. Juan Carlos Castenada: Defining Active Participation in Criminal Street Gangs

Date: Jul 14, 2000
Defining Active Participation in Criminal Street Gangs: Insights from People v. Juan Carlos Castenada Introduction People v. Juan Carlos Castenada is a landmark 2000 decision by the Supreme Court of...
Affirmation of Death Sentence and Upholding Multiple-Murder Special Circumstances: PEOPLE v. LUCERO

Affirmation of Death Sentence and Upholding Multiple-Murder Special Circumstances: PEOPLE v. LUCERO

Date: Jul 14, 2000
Affirmation of Death Sentence and Upholding Multiple-Murder Special Circumstances: PEOPLE v. LUCERO Introduction People v. Philip Louis Lucero, 23 Cal.4th 692 (2000), is a seminal decision by the...
Reaffirmation of Dangerousness Requirement in Involuntary Manslaughter: People v. Cox

Reaffirmation of Dangerousness Requirement in Involuntary Manslaughter: People v. Cox

Date: Jul 11, 2000
Reaffirmation of Dangerousness Requirement in Involuntary Manslaughter: People v. Cox Introduction Case: The People v. Julius Lamar Cox (In re Julius Lamar Cox on Habeas Corpus) Court: Supreme Court...
People v. Coddington (2000): Balancing Legal Insanity and Punitive Measures in Capital Cases

People v. Coddington (2000): Balancing Legal Insanity and Punitive Measures in Capital Cases

Date: Jul 4, 2000
People v. Coddington (2000): Balancing Legal Insanity and Punitive Measures in Capital Cases Introduction People v. Herbert James Coddington is a landmark decision by the Supreme Court of California,...
Voluntary Manslaughter Without Provocation: Analysis of The People v. Ricardo Ramirez Rios

Voluntary Manslaughter Without Provocation: Analysis of The People v. Ricardo Ramirez Rios

Date: Jun 30, 2000
Voluntary Manslaughter Without Provocation: Analysis of The People v. Ricardo Ramirez Rios Introduction The People v. Ricardo Ramirez Rios (23 Cal.4th 450) is a significant ruling by the Supreme...
Roberti-Roos Assault Weapons Control Act: Upholding Equal Protection and Separation of Powers

Roberti-Roos Assault Weapons Control Act: Upholding Equal Protection and Separation of Powers

Date: Jun 30, 2000
Roberti-Roos Assault Weapons Control Act: Upholding Equal Protection and Separation of Powers Introduction The case of Peter Alan Kasler et al. v. Bill Lockyer as Attorney General et al. (23 Cal.4th...
LINDER v. THRIFTY OIL CO.: Reinforcing the Procedural Integrity of Class Certification

LINDER v. THRIFTY OIL CO.: Reinforcing the Procedural Integrity of Class Certification

Date: Jun 27, 2000
LINDER v. THRIFTY OIL CO.: Reinforcing the Procedural Integrity of Class Certification Introduction LINDER v. THRIFTY OIL CO. (23 Cal.4th 429, 2000) is a landmark decision by the Supreme Court of...
Insurer's Rejection of Comparative Bad Faith Defense in Bad Faith Actions: Analysis of Kransco v. American Empire Surplus Lines Insurance Company

Insurer's Rejection of Comparative Bad Faith Defense in Bad Faith Actions: Analysis of Kransco v. American Empire Surplus Lines Insurance Company

Date: Jun 21, 2000
Insurer's Rejection of Comparative Bad Faith Defense in Bad Faith Actions: Analysis of Kransco v. American Empire Surplus Lines Insurance Company Introduction Parties Involved: Kransco: Plaintiff and...
California Supreme Court Establishes Resentencing Protections Against Increased Restitution Fines

California Supreme Court Establishes Resentencing Protections Against Increased Restitution Fines

Date: Jun 20, 2000
California Supreme Court Establishes Resentencing Protections Against Increased Restitution Fines Introduction The case of The People v. Melvin Eugene Hanson (23 Cal.4th 355) marks a significant...
Limited Monetary Remedies under Promissory Estoppel in Public Bidding: Kajima v. MTA

Limited Monetary Remedies under Promissory Estoppel in Public Bidding: Kajima v. MTA

Date: Jun 13, 2000
Limited Monetary Remedies under Promissory Estoppel in Public Bidding: Kajima v. MTA Introduction The landmark case of Kajima/Ray Wilson, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Los Angeles County Metropolitan...
Unlawful Concealed Carry of Dirk or Dagger: Specific Intent Not Required

Unlawful Concealed Carry of Dirk or Dagger: Specific Intent Not Required

Date: Jun 13, 2000
Unlawful Concealed Carry of Dirk or Dagger: Specific Intent Not Required Introduction In the landmark case of The People v. Ernesto Arnoldo Rubalcava, decided by the Supreme Court of California on...
The People v. Ronaldo Medrano Ayala: Upholding Courtroom Security and Evidentiary Standards

The People v. Ronaldo Medrano Ayala: Upholding Courtroom Security and Evidentiary Standards

Date: Jun 9, 2000
The People v. Ronaldo Medrano Ayala: Upholding Courtroom Security and Evidentiary Standards Introduction The People v. Ronaldo Medrano Ayala is a significant judgment delivered by the Supreme Court...
Recognition of Unpaid Wages as Restitution under California's Unfair Competition Law

Recognition of Unpaid Wages as Restitution under California's Unfair Competition Law

Date: Jun 6, 2000
Recognition of Unpaid Wages as Restitution under California's Unfair Competition Law Introduction The case Cortez v. Purolator Air Filtration Products Company (23 Cal.4th 163, 2000) marks a...
Requiring Prejudice for Vacating Pleas under Penal Code Section 1016.5

Requiring Prejudice for Vacating Pleas under Penal Code Section 1016.5

Date: Jun 6, 2000
Requiring Prejudice for Vacating Pleas under Penal Code Section 1016.5 Introduction The People v. Zamudio is a landmark decision by the Supreme Court of California, adjudicated on June 5, 2000. This...
Disgorgement into Fluid Recovery Funds Not Permitted in Representative UCL Actions

Disgorgement into Fluid Recovery Funds Not Permitted in Representative UCL Actions

Date: Jun 6, 2000
Disgorgement into Fluid Recovery Funds Not Permitted in Representative UCL Actions Introduction In the seminal case of Vickey Kraus et al. v. Trinity Management Services Inc., the Supreme Court of...
Voluntary Manslaughter in Unintentional Self-Defense: People v. Blakeley

Voluntary Manslaughter in Unintentional Self-Defense: People v. Blakeley

Date: Jun 3, 2000
Voluntary Manslaughter in Unintentional Self-Defense: People v. Blakeley Introduction People v. George John Blakeley (23 Cal.4th 82) is a landmark decision by the Supreme Court of California that...
Lasko Jr. v. The People: Redefining Intent in Voluntary Manslaughter

Lasko Jr. v. The People: Redefining Intent in Voluntary Manslaughter

Date: Jun 3, 2000
Lasko Jr. v. The People: Redefining Intent in Voluntary Manslaughter Introduction Lasko Jr. v. The People (23 Cal.4th 101, 2000) is a landmark decision by the Supreme Court of California that...
California Supreme Court Establishes Parameters for Unilateral Termination of Employment Policies within Contracts

California Supreme Court Establishes Parameters for Unilateral Termination of Employment Policies within Contracts

Date: Jun 2, 2000
California Supreme Court Establishes Parameters for Unilateral Termination of Employment Policies within Contracts Introduction In the landmark case of CRAIG ASMUS et al. v. PACIFIC BELL et al., the...
Admissibility of Hearsay Statements from Incompetent Minors in Dependency Proceedings: IN RE LUCERO L., 22 Cal.4th 1227

Admissibility of Hearsay Statements from Incompetent Minors in Dependency Proceedings: IN RE LUCERO L., 22 Cal.4th 1227

Date: May 23, 2000
Admissibility of Hearsay Statements from Incompetent Minors in Dependency Proceedings: IN RE LUCERO L., 22 Cal.4th 1227 Introduction The case of IN RE LUCERO L., decided by the Supreme Court of...
A Comprehensive Commentary on People v. Riel (22 Cal.4th 1153): Affirmation of Capital Conviction and Procedural Safeguards

A Comprehensive Commentary on People v. Riel (22 Cal.4th 1153): Affirmation of Capital Conviction and Procedural Safeguards

Date: May 19, 2000
Affirmation of Capital Conviction in People v. Riel (22 Cal.4th 1153): A Comprehensive Commentary Introduction The case of The People v. Charles Dell Riel, reported as 22 Cal.4th 1153, presents a...
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