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

District Of Columbia Case Commentaries

Expanding the Duty of Care in Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress: HEDGEPETH v. WHITMAN WALKER CLinic

Expanding the Duty of Care in Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress: HEDGEPETH v. WHITMAN WALKER CLinic

Date: Jul 1, 2011
Expanding the Duty of Care in Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress: HEDGEPETH v. WHITMAN WALKER CLinic Introduction In the landmark case of Terry HEDGEPETH v. WHITMAN WALKER CLinic (22 A.3d...
Reciprocal Disciplinary Measures in Attorney Regulation: Insights from In re Montgomery Blair Sibley

Reciprocal Disciplinary Measures in Attorney Regulation: Insights from In re Montgomery Blair Sibley

Date: Mar 12, 2010
Reciprocal Disciplinary Measures in Attorney Regulation: Insights from In re Montgomery Blair Sibley Introduction The case of In re Montgomery Blair Sibley examines the application of reciprocal...
Confidentiality Clauses in Settlement Agreements: Insights from Tsintolas Realty Co. v. Mendez

Confidentiality Clauses in Settlement Agreements: Insights from Tsintolas Realty Co. v. Mendez

Date: Nov 26, 2009
Confidentiality Clauses in Settlement Agreements: Insights from Tsintolas Realty Co. v. Mendez Introduction The legal landscape surrounding settlement agreements is continually evolving, particularly...
Defining Reciprocal Admonishment: Insights from In re Lawrence A. Fuller

Defining Reciprocal Admonishment: Insights from In re Lawrence A. Fuller

Date: Aug 10, 2007
Defining Reciprocal Admonishment: Insights from In re Lawrence A. Fuller Introduction The disciplinary proceedings against Lawrence A. Fuller, as adjudicated in In re Lawrence A. Fuller, serve as a...
Strengthening Reciprocal Discipline: D.C. Court of Appeals' Decision in In re Dushan S. Zdravkovich

Strengthening Reciprocal Discipline: D.C. Court of Appeals' Decision in In re Dushan S. Zdravkovich

Date: Sep 12, 2003
Strengthening Reciprocal Discipline: D.C. Court of Appeals' Decision in In re Dushan S. Zdravkovich Introduction The case of In re Dushan S. Zdravkovich addresses the disciplinary actions taken...
No Automobile Exception in Constructive Possession: RIVAS v. UNITED STATES

No Automobile Exception in Constructive Possession: RIVAS v. UNITED STATES

Date: Aug 24, 2001
No Automobile Exception in Constructive Possession: RIVAS v. UNITED STATES Introduction RIVAS v. UNITED STATES is a pivotal case adjudicated by the District of Columbia Court of Appeals on August 23,...
Enforcement of Tenure Policies and Summary Judgment in Academic Employment Litigation: Alakananda Paul v. Howard University

Enforcement of Tenure Policies and Summary Judgment in Academic Employment Litigation: Alakananda Paul v. Howard University

Date: May 26, 2000
Enforcement of Tenure Policies and Summary Judgment in Academic Employment Litigation: Alakananda Paul v. Howard University Introduction The case of Alakananda Paul v. Howard University revolves...
Reaffirming the Drew Rule and Integrating FRE 403: Landmark Decision in William A. Johnson v. United States

Reaffirming the Drew Rule and Integrating FRE 403: Landmark Decision in William A. Johnson v. United States

Date: Oct 18, 1996
Reaffirming the Drew Rule and Integrating FRE 403: Landmark Decision in William A. Johnson v. United States Introduction The case of William A. Johnson, Appellant, v. United States, Appellee (683...
Establishing Reciprocal Disciplinary Standards for Legal Misconduct: The Goldsborough Case

Establishing Reciprocal Disciplinary Standards for Legal Misconduct: The Goldsborough Case

Date: Feb 24, 1995
Establishing Reciprocal Disciplinary Standards for Legal Misconduct: The Goldsborough Case Introduction The case of In re George J. Goldsborough, decided by the District of Columbia Court of Appeals...
Reciprocal Discipline in Legal Practice: Insights from In re Mark H. Zilberberg

Reciprocal Discipline in Legal Practice: Insights from In re Mark H. Zilberberg

Date: Aug 5, 1992
Reciprocal Discipline in Legal Practice: Insights from In re Mark H. Zilberberg Introduction The case of In re Mark H. Zilberberg, decided by the District of Columbia Court of Appeals on August 4,...
Establishing a Public Policy Exception to the At-Will Employment Doctrine in Wrongful Discharge Cases

Establishing a Public Policy Exception to the At-Will Employment Doctrine in Wrongful Discharge Cases

Date: Sep 18, 1991
Establishing a Public Policy Exception to the At-Will Employment Doctrine in Wrongful Discharge Cases Introduction The case of Robert L. Adams v. George W. Cochran Company, Inc. (597 A.2d 28)...
Reaffirmation of Presumptive Disbarment for Intentional Misappropriation of Client Funds

Reaffirmation of Presumptive Disbarment for Intentional Misappropriation of Client Funds

Date: Aug 7, 1990
Reaffirmation of Presumptive Disbarment for Intentional Misappropriation of Client Funds Introduction In the matter of Nicholas Addams, a member of the Bar of the District of Columbia Court of...
Insufficient Evidence for Constructive Possession in CURRY v. UNITED STATES

Insufficient Evidence for Constructive Possession in CURRY v. UNITED STATES

Date: Jan 15, 1987
Insufficient Evidence for Constructive Possession in Curry v. United States Introduction Patricia Curry, Wayne P. Washington, and James C. Jones were charged by the United States with various...
Expectation of Reappointment and Tenure: Howard University v. Marie L. Best

Expectation of Reappointment and Tenure: Howard University v. Marie L. Best

Date: Nov 10, 1984
Expectation of Reappointment and Tenure: Howard University v. Marie L. Best Introduction Howard University, Appellant, Cross-Appellee, v. Marie L. Best, Appellee, Cross-Appellant (484 A.2d 958) is a...
Reversing Donahue: Timely Filing of Tax Appeals under D.C. Code §47-2403

Reversing Donahue: Timely Filing of Tax Appeals under D.C. Code §47-2403

Date: Dec 16, 1983
Reversing Donahue: Timely Filing of Tax Appeals under D.C. Code §47-2403 Introduction In the landmark case of PEOPLES DRUG STORES, INC., v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, the District of Columbia Court of...
Defining 'Determine to Sell' in Reciprocal Buy-Out Lease Provisions: Insights from Holland v. Hannan

Defining 'Determine to Sell' in Reciprocal Buy-Out Lease Provisions: Insights from Holland v. Hannan

Date: Jan 21, 1983
Defining 'Determine to Sell' in Reciprocal Buy-Out Lease Provisions: Insights from Holland v. Hannan Introduction In the landmark case of Robert M. Holland, et al. v. William T. Hannan, et al.,...
Nader v. Toledano: Establishing Standards for Summary Judgment in Public Figure Defamation Cases

Nader v. Toledano: Establishing Standards for Summary Judgment in Public Figure Defamation Cases

Date: Aug 1, 1979
Nader v. Toledano: Establishing Standards for Summary Judgment in Public Figure Defamation Cases Introduction Ralph Nader, Appellant, v. Ralph de Toledano and Copley Press, Inc., Appellees (408 A.2d...
Enhancing Fairness in Multi-Defendant Trials: Severance Motions and Unified Jury Verdicts in Johnson et al. v. United States

Enhancing Fairness in Multi-Defendant Trials: Severance Motions and Unified Jury Verdicts in Johnson et al. v. United States

Date: Feb 1, 1979
Enhancing Fairness in Multi-Defendant Trials: Severance Motions and Unified Jury Verdicts in Johnson et al. v. United States Introduction Johnson, Sampson, Smith, and George v. United States, decided...
Reaffirmation of Balanced Jury Instructions: Stanley WATTS v. UNITED STATES

Reaffirmation of Balanced Jury Instructions: Stanley WATTS v. UNITED STATES

Date: Jul 29, 1976
Reaffirmation of Balanced Jury Instructions: Stanley WATTS v. UNITED STATES Introduction Stanley WATTS v. UNITED STATES (362 A.2d 706) is a landmark case adjudicated by the District of Columbia Court...
No Constitutional Right to Probable Cause Hearings for Juveniles: M.A.P. v. Ryan

No Constitutional Right to Probable Cause Hearings for Juveniles: M.A.P. v. Ryan

Date: Dec 30, 1971
No Constitutional Right to Probable Cause Hearings for Juveniles: M.A.P. v. Ryan Introduction The case of M. A. P., a Juvenile, Petitioner v. Honorable Joseph M. F. Ryan, Jr., Respondent was...
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