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

Minnesota Case Commentaries

Establishing Standards for Postconviction Relief Proceedings: Insights from John K.D. Scruggs v. State of Minnesota

Establishing Standards for Postconviction Relief Proceedings: Insights from John K.D. Scruggs v. State of Minnesota

Date: May 2, 1992
Establishing Standards for Postconviction Relief Proceedings: Insights from John K.D. Scruggs v. State of Minnesota Introduction The case of John K.D. Scruggs v. State of Minnesota (484 N.W.2d 21)...
Balancing Confidential Medical Privilege and Defendant's Right to Fair Trial: Minnesota v. Hummel

Balancing Confidential Medical Privilege and Defendant's Right to Fair Trial: Minnesota v. Hummel

Date: Apr 18, 1992
Balancing Confidential Medical Privilege and Defendant's Right to Fair Trial: Minnesota v. Hummel Introduction State of Minnesota v. Jimmy Robert Hummel is a pivotal 1992 decision by the Supreme...
Affirmation of Fourth Amendment Protections in Warrantless Searches: STATE v. DICKERSON

Affirmation of Fourth Amendment Protections in Warrantless Searches: STATE v. DICKERSON

Date: Mar 21, 1992
Affirmation of Fourth Amendment Protections in Warrantless Searches: STATE v. DICKERSON Introduction State of Minnesota v. Timothy Eugene Dickerson, 481 N.W.2d 840 (Minn. 1992), addresses the...
Strict Protection of Home Against Warrantless Searches: Minnesota v. Othoudt

Strict Protection of Home Against Warrantless Searches: Minnesota v. Othoudt

Date: Mar 14, 1992
Strict Protection of Home Against Warrantless Searches: Minnesota v. Othoudt Introduction Minnesota v. Othoudt, 482 N.W.2d 218 (Minn. 1992), is a landmark case adjudicated by the Supreme Court of...
STATE v. MOORE: Reinforcing Consistent Verdicts and Premeditation Standards in First-Degree Murder

STATE v. MOORE: Reinforcing Consistent Verdicts and Premeditation Standards in First-Degree Murder

Date: Mar 7, 1992
STATE v. MOORE: Reinforcing Consistent Verdicts and Premeditation Standards in First-Degree Murder Introduction State of Minnesota v. Eugene Dennis Moore, 481 N.W.2d 355 (Minn. 1992), is a pivotal...
Permissive Inference in Drug Possession Cases: Analysis of State v. Olson

Permissive Inference in Drug Possession Cases: Analysis of State v. Olson

Date: Feb 29, 1992
Permissive Inference in Drug Possession Cases: Analysis of State v. Olson Introduction State of Minnesota v. Larry Brian Olson is a landmark case decided by the Supreme Court of Minnesota on February...
Affirming Stackable Optional Coverage under Minnesota No-Fault Automobile Insurance Act

Affirming Stackable Optional Coverage under Minnesota No-Fault Automobile Insurance Act

Date: Feb 27, 1992
Affirming Stackable Optional Coverage under Minnesota No-Fault Automobile Insurance Act Introduction The case of Michael Da v. Meister, et al. (479 N.W.2d 372) adjudicated by the Supreme Court of...
Misconduct in Employment and Unemployment Benefits: Insights from MARKEL v. CITY OF CIRCLE PINES

Misconduct in Employment and Unemployment Benefits: Insights from MARKEL v. CITY OF CIRCLE PINES

Date: Jan 18, 1992
Misconduct in Employment and Unemployment Benefits: Insights from MARKEL v. CITY OF CIRCLE PINES Introduction MARKEL v. CITY OF CIRCLE PINES is a pivotal case decided by the Supreme Court of...
Employment Rights of In-House Counsel: NORDLING v. NORTHERN STATES POWER COmpany

Employment Rights of In-House Counsel: NORDLING v. NORTHERN STATES POWER COmpany

Date: Dec 28, 1991
Employment Rights of In-House Counsel: NORDLING v. NORTHERN STATES POWER COmpany Introduction The case of Gale K. NORDLING v. NORTHERN STATES POWER COmpany examines the intricate balance between the...
Equal Protection in Drug Legislation: Minnesota Supreme Court Declares Crack Powder Classification Unconstitutional

Equal Protection in Drug Legislation: Minnesota Supreme Court Declares Crack Powder Classification Unconstitutional

Date: Dec 14, 1991
Equal Protection in Drug Legislation: Minnesota Supreme Court Declares Crack Powder Classification Unconstitutional Introduction In the landmark case of State of Minnesota v. Gerard Russell et al.,...
Competency and Medication: Affirming Standards in Fox v. State of Minnesota

Competency and Medication: Affirming Standards in Fox v. State of Minnesota

Date: Oct 5, 1991
Competency and Medication: Affirming Standards in Fox v. State of Minnesota Introduction Audie Lynn Fox v. State of Minnesota, 474 N.W.2d 821 (Minn. 1991), is a pivotal case adjudicated by the...
Right to Counsel During Implied Consent Testing in DWI Cases: An Analysis of McDonnell et al. v. Commissioner of Public Safety

Right to Counsel During Implied Consent Testing in DWI Cases: An Analysis of McDonnell et al. v. Commissioner of Public Safety

Date: Sep 6, 1991
Right to Counsel During Implied Consent Testing in DWI Cases: An Analysis of McDonnell et al. v. Commissioner of Public Safety Introduction The Supreme Court of Minnesota rendered a significant...
Establishing Legal Standards for Pretrial Procedures and Jury Selection in State v. Cal

Establishing Legal Standards for Pretrial Procedures and Jury Selection in State v. Cal

Date: Aug 10, 1991
Establishing Legal Standards for Pretrial Procedures and Jury Selection in State of Minnesota v. Cal Introduction State of Minnesota v. Calvin Lamont Everett is a pivotal case decided by the Supreme...
Affirmation of Convictions and Proper Handling of Miranda Rights in STATE v. Pilcher

Affirmation of Convictions and Proper Handling of Miranda Rights in STATE v. Pilcher

Date: Jul 27, 1991
Affirmation of Convictions and Proper Handling of Miranda Rights in STATE v. Pilcher Introduction State of Minnesota v. Kenneth Wayne Pilcher, 472 N.W.2d 327 (Minn. 1991), is a landmark case...
RICO v. STATE of Minnesota: Strengthening Discretionary Function and Official Immunity in Employment Retaliation Cases

RICO v. STATE of Minnesota: Strengthening Discretionary Function and Official Immunity in Employment Retaliation Cases

Date: Jun 22, 1991
RICO v. STATE of Minnesota: Strengthening Discretionary Function and Official Immunity in Employment Retaliation Cases Introduction Edward J. Rico, an employee within the Minnesota Department of...
Withdrawal of Guilty Pleas and Attorney Coercion: State v. Kaiser

Withdrawal of Guilty Pleas and Attorney Coercion: State v. Kaiser

Date: May 25, 1991
Withdrawal of Guilty Pleas and Attorney Coercion: State v. Kaiser (1991) Introduction The case of State of Minnesota v. Todd Anthony Kaiser (469 N.W.2d 316) adjudicated by the Supreme Court of...
Clarifying Jury Trial Waiver and Upholding Damages Caps: Insights from the Minnesota Supreme Court in Schweich v. Ziegler, Inc.

Clarifying Jury Trial Waiver and Upholding Damages Caps: Insights from the Minnesota Supreme Court in Schweich v. Ziegler, Inc.

Date: Feb 16, 1991
Clarifying Jury Trial Waiver and Upholding Damages Caps: Insights from the Minnesota Supreme Court in Schweich v. Ziegler, Inc. Introduction The case of Lawrence Schweich, et al. v. Ziegler, Inc....
State v. DeWald: Affirmation of Spreigl Evidence Admissibility Standards in Minnesota

State v. DeWald: Affirmation of Spreigl Evidence Admissibility Standards in Minnesota

Date: Jan 19, 1991
State v. DeWald: Affirmation of Spreigl Evidence Admissibility Standards in Minnesota Introduction State of Minnesota v. James Albert DeWald is a landmark case adjudicated by the Supreme Court of...
Uselman v. Uselman: Supreme Court of Minnesota Restricts Rule 11 Sanctions Against Counsel

Uselman v. Uselman: Supreme Court of Minnesota Restricts Rule 11 Sanctions Against Counsel

Date: Dec 15, 1990
Uselman v. Uselman: Supreme Court of Minnesota Restricts Rule 11 Sanctions Against Counsel Introduction Uselman v. Uselman, 464 N.W.2d 130 (Minn. 1990), is a seminal case adjudicated by the Supreme...
Prosecutorial Conduct and Admissibility of Evidence in STATE v. DeWald

Prosecutorial Conduct and Admissibility of Evidence in STATE v. DeWald

Date: Dec 1, 1990
Prosecutorial Conduct and Admissibility of Evidence in STATE of Minnesota v. James Albert DeWald Introduction STATE of Minnesota v. James Albert DeWald is a pivotal case adjudicated by the Supreme...
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