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

Montana Case Commentaries

Ragner v. State: Reinforcing the Strickland Prejudice Threshold for Omitted-Witness Ineffective-Assistance Claims

Ragner v. State: Reinforcing the Strickland Prejudice Threshold for Omitted-Witness Ineffective-Assistance Claims

Date: Jul 10, 2025
Ragner v. State: Reinforcing the Strickland Prejudice Threshold for Omitted-Witness Ineffective-Assistance Claims 1. Introduction Shelby Ragner was convicted by a Gallatin County jury of Sexual...
“Private Words, Public Peace” – State v. Baertsch and the Public-Disturbance Threshold for Disorderly Conduct

“Private Words, Public Peace” – State v. Baertsch and the Public-Disturbance Threshold for Disorderly Conduct

Date: Jul 10, 2025
“Private Words, Public Peace” – State v. Baertsch and the Public-Disturbance Threshold for Disorderly Conduct 1. Introduction State v. Douglas Baertsch, 2025 MT 143, is a high-profile decision of the...
Schultz and the “Fictional Victim” Rule:  Mandatory-Minimum Enhancements Require an Actual Child Victim

Schultz and the “Fictional Victim” Rule: Mandatory-Minimum Enhancements Require an Actual Child Victim

Date: Jul 10, 2025
Schultz and the “Fictional Victim” Rule: Mandatory-Minimum Enhancements Require an Actual Child Victim Introduction State v. Schultz, 2025 MT 142, arises from an Internet sting in which David Ray...

        “Failing the PSI”: How Non-Compliance with Presentence Investigation Requirements Constitutes a
        Material Breach that Releases the State from Its Plea-Agreement Sentencing Recommendation —
        Commentary on State v. N. Huff, 2025 MT 152N

“Failing the PSI”: How Non-Compliance with Presentence Investigation Requirements Constitutes a Material Breach that Releases the State from Its Plea-Agreement Sentencing Recommendation — Commentary on State v. N. Huff, 2025 MT 152N

Date: Jul 10, 2025
“Failing the PSI”: How Non-Compliance with Presentence Investigation Requirements Constitutes a Material Breach that Releases the State from Its Plea-Agreement Sentencing Recommendation — Commentary...
“Two Paths for Victim-Violence Evidence”: Clarifying Rule 404(a)(2) & 405(a) After State v. Donahue (2025 MT 144)

“Two Paths for Victim-Violence Evidence”: Clarifying Rule 404(a)(2) & 405(a) After State v. Donahue (2025 MT 144)

Date: Jul 10, 2025
“Two Paths for Victim-Violence Evidence” Clarifying Rule 404(a)(2) & 405(a) in Self-Defense Cases — Commentary on State v. R. Donahue, 2025 MT 144 1. Introduction In State v. Donahue the Montana...
Illustrative Evidence vs. Testimonial Content: The Montana Supreme Court’s Clarification on Jury Access to Child-Witness Drawings in State v. Walks (2025 MT 147)

Illustrative Evidence vs. Testimonial Content: The Montana Supreme Court’s Clarification on Jury Access to Child-Witness Drawings in State v. Walks (2025 MT 147)

Date: Jul 10, 2025
Illustrative Evidence vs. Testimonial Content: The Montana Supreme Court’s Clarification on Jury Access to Child-Witness Drawings in State v. Walks (2025 MT 147) Introduction State v. Stephen Eric...

        “Restoring the Road”: Stephenson v. Lone Peak – 2025 MT 148
        and the Refined Status-Quo Test for Preliminary Injunctions in Easement Disputes

“Restoring the Road”: Stephenson v. Lone Peak – 2025 MT 148 and the Refined Status-Quo Test for Preliminary Injunctions in Easement Disputes

Date: Jul 10, 2025
“Restoring the Road”: Stephenson v. Lone Peak – 2025 MT 148 and the Refined Status-Quo Test for Preliminary Injunctions in Easement Disputes Introduction Stephenson v. Lone Peak, 2025 MT 148, is the...
“No Emergency of One’s Own Making” – The Montana Supreme Court Clarifies Timeliness and Factual Sufficiency for Original Jurisdiction Petitions

“No Emergency of One’s Own Making” – The Montana Supreme Court Clarifies Timeliness and Factual Sufficiency for Original Jurisdiction Petitions

Date: Jul 4, 2025
“No Emergency of One’s Own Making” – The Montana Supreme Court Clarifies Timeliness and Factual Sufficiency for Original Jurisdiction Petitions 1. Introduction On 1 July 2025, the Supreme Court of...
Settlement Offers Do Not Waive Contractual Conditions Precedent – A Commentary on Kratzer Construction v. Hardy Construction (2025 MT 140)

Settlement Offers Do Not Waive Contractual Conditions Precedent – A Commentary on Kratzer Construction v. Hardy Construction (2025 MT 140)

Date: Jul 4, 2025
Settlement Offers Do Not Waive Contractual Conditions Precedent Commentary on Kratzer Construction v. Hardy Construction Co., Inc., 2025 MT 140 Introduction In Kratzer Construction v. Hardy...

    Testimony by Non-Presiding Judges and the Discretionary Weight of GAL
    Recommendations in Montana Parenting-Plan Litigation

Testimony by Non-Presiding Judges and the Discretionary Weight of GAL Recommendations in Montana Parenting-Plan Litigation

Date: Jul 4, 2025
Testimony by Non-Presiding Judges and the Discretionary Weight of Guardian Ad Litem Recommendations in Montana Parenting-Plan Litigation 1. Introduction Case: In re the Marriage of Kahl & Sperano,...
Stipulations and Harmless Error: The Montana Supreme Court Refines Right-to-Counsel Violations, Tribal Transfer Motions, and ICWA Placement in In re I.R.S. & M.W.A.H.

Stipulations and Harmless Error: The Montana Supreme Court Refines Right-to-Counsel Violations, Tribal Transfer Motions, and ICWA Placement in In re I.R.S. & M.W.A.H.

Date: Jul 4, 2025
Stipulations and Harmless Error: The Montana Supreme Court Refines Right-to-Counsel Violations, Tribal Transfer Motions, and ICWA Placement in In re I.R.S. & M.W.A.H. Introduction On 1 July 2025 the...

    “More Than a Question”:  The Montana Supreme Court Clarifies that a Mere Inquiry
    Is Not a Motion to Transfer under MICWA § 41-3-1310 and Re-confirms the Narrow
    Scope of Relative Intervention in Indian Child Guardianships

“More Than a Question”: The Montana Supreme Court Clarifies that a Mere Inquiry Is Not a Motion to Transfer under MICWA § 41-3-1310 and Re-confirms the Narrow Scope of Relative Intervention in Indian Child Guardianships

Date: Jul 4, 2025
“More Than a Question”: The Montana Supreme Court Clarifies that a Mere Inquiry Is Not a Motion to Transfer under MICWA § 41-3-1310 and Re-confirms the Narrow Scope of Relative Intervention in Indian...
State v. Warr: Mandatory Second-Chance Withdrawal after Rejection of a Binding Plea Agreement under § 46-12-211(4), MCA

State v. Warr: Mandatory Second-Chance Withdrawal after Rejection of a Binding Plea Agreement under § 46-12-211(4), MCA

Date: Jul 4, 2025
State v. Warr: Mandatory Second-Chance Withdrawal after Rejection of a Binding Plea Agreement under § 46-12-211(4), MCA Introduction In State v. J. Warr, 2025 MT 138, the Montana Supreme Court...
State v. Welzel: Clarifying “Under the Order of the Court” for Credit on Time Spent in Residential Treatment Facilities

State v. Welzel: Clarifying “Under the Order of the Court” for Credit on Time Spent in Residential Treatment Facilities

Date: Jul 4, 2025
State v. Welzel: Clarifying “Under the Order of the Court” for Credit on Time Spent in Residential Treatment Facilities Introduction State v. Welzel, 2025 MT 136, is a decision of the Supreme Court...
Expanding Fee-Shifting under Montana’s UDJA: A Commentary on Upper Missouri Waterkeeper v. DNRC (2025)

Expanding Fee-Shifting under Montana’s UDJA: A Commentary on Upper Missouri Waterkeeper v. DNRC (2025)

Date: Jul 4, 2025
Expanding Fee-Shifting under Montana’s UDJA: A Detailed Commentary on Upper Missouri Waterkeeper v. Broadwater County & DNRC (2025 MT 137) 1. Introduction Upper Missouri Waterkeeper, several local...
“Speculation Is Not a Fact” – The Montana Supreme Court’s Clarification of Due-Process Limits on Victim-Impact Statements in State v. C. Jacob

“Speculation Is Not a Fact” – The Montana Supreme Court’s Clarification of Due-Process Limits on Victim-Impact Statements in State v. C. Jacob

Date: Jun 25, 2025
“Speculation Is Not a Fact” – The Montana Supreme Court’s Clarification of Due-Process Limits on Victim-Impact Statements in State v. C. Jacob I. Introduction On 24 June 2025, the Supreme Court of...
State v. Matthews: Re-defining the Weight of Officer Testimony versus Dash-Cam Evidence in Particularized Suspicion Analysis

State v. Matthews: Re-defining the Weight of Officer Testimony versus Dash-Cam Evidence in Particularized Suspicion Analysis

Date: Jun 25, 2025
State v. Matthews: Re-defining the Weight of Officer Testimony versus Dash-Cam Evidence in Particularized Suspicion Analysis Introduction State v. T. Matthews, 2025 MT 129, presented the Montana...
Waiver-by-Mootness:  The Montana Supreme Court Clarifies Jurisdiction After Insurer’s Post-Payment “Reservation of Rights”  (Commentary on Perea v. AmTrust Ins., 2025 MT 130)

Waiver-by-Mootness: The Montana Supreme Court Clarifies Jurisdiction After Insurer’s Post-Payment “Reservation of Rights” (Commentary on Perea v. AmTrust Ins., 2025 MT 130)

Date: Jun 25, 2025
Waiver-by-Mootness: The Montana Supreme Court Clarifies Jurisdiction After Insurer’s Post-Payment “Reservation of Rights” Commentary on Perea v. AmTrust Insurance Co., 2025 MT 130 Introduction Perea...
“No Live Case, No Power to Hear”:  Hawkins v. State (2025) and the Jurisdictional Pre-Condition for Interlocutory Appeals from the Montana Tax Appeal Board

“No Live Case, No Power to Hear”: Hawkins v. State (2025) and the Jurisdictional Pre-Condition for Interlocutory Appeals from the Montana Tax Appeal Board

Date: Jun 25, 2025
“No Live Case, No Power to Hear”: Hawkins v. State, 2025 MT 134 — Cementing the Rule that District Court Interlocutory Jurisdiction under § 15-2-305, MCA, Requires an Active MTAB Proceeding...
Distinct Penetrations, Distinct Crimes: State v. Foster Establishes Clear Test for Multiple Sexual-Offense Charges and Limits on Presence-of-Defendant Error

Distinct Penetrations, Distinct Crimes: State v. Foster Establishes Clear Test for Multiple Sexual-Offense Charges and Limits on Presence-of-Defendant Error

Date: Jun 25, 2025
Distinct Penetrations, Distinct Crimes: State v. Foster Establishes Clear Test for Multiple Sexual-Offense Charges and Limits on Presence-of-Defendant Error Introduction State v. Donald Edward...
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