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

Tennessee Case Commentaries

Strict Compliance with Rule 37(b)(2)(iv) for Reserving Dispositive Legal Questions Affirmed in STATE of Tennessee v. Pendergrass

Strict Compliance with Rule 37(b)(2)(iv) for Reserving Dispositive Legal Questions Affirmed in STATE of Tennessee v. Pendergrass

Date: Nov 13, 1996
Strict Compliance with Rule 37(b)(2)(iv) for Reserving Dispositive Legal Questions Affirmed in State of Tennessee v. Pendergrass Introduction State of Tennessee v. Sheryl L. Pendergrass, 937 S.W.2d...
Randolph v. Randolph: Defining "Knowledgeably" in Antenuptial Agreements

Randolph v. Randolph: Defining "Knowledgeably" in Antenuptial Agreements

Date: Oct 29, 1996
Randolph v. Randolph: Defining "Knowledgeably" in Antenuptial Agreements Introduction Randolph v. Randolph, 937 S.W.2d 815 (Tenn. 1996), is a pivotal case adjudicated by the Supreme Court of...
Balancing Duty of Care for Business Owners in Third-Party Criminal Acts: McClung v. Wal-Mart

Balancing Duty of Care for Business Owners in Third-Party Criminal Acts: McClung v. Wal-Mart

Date: Oct 29, 1996
Balancing Duty of Care for Business Owners in Third-Party Criminal Acts: McClung v. Wal-Mart Introduction McClung v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. is a landmark case adjudicated by the Supreme Court of...
Admissibility of Child Declarants under Rule 803(4): Insights from STATE of Tennessee v. McLeod and Young

Admissibility of Child Declarants under Rule 803(4): Insights from STATE of Tennessee v. McLeod and Young

Date: Oct 15, 1996
Admissibility of Child Declarants under Rule 803(4): Insights from STATE of Tennessee v. McLeod and Young Introduction The Supreme Court of Tennessee, in the consolidated appeals of STATE of...
Affirming Judicial Discretion in Sentencing: STATE of Tennessee v. Karen Sue Boggs

Affirming Judicial Discretion in Sentencing: STATE of Tennessee v. Karen Sue Boggs

Date: Oct 15, 1996
Affirming Judicial Discretion in Sentencing: STATE of Tennessee v. Karen Sue Boggs Introduction STATE of Tennessee v. Karen Sue Boggs (932 S.W.2d 467) is a significant case adjudicated by the Court...
Unvested Retirement Benefits and Increased Equity in Separate Property as Marital Property: Insights from Pamela Dianne Lomax Cohen v. Jay Ste

Unvested Retirement Benefits and Increased Equity in Separate Property as Marital Property: Insights from Pamela Dianne Lomax Cohen v. Jay Ste

Date: Sep 17, 1996
Unvested Retirement Benefits and Increased Equity in Separate Property as Marital Property: Insights from Pamela Dianne Lomax Cohen v. Jay Ste Introduction Pamela Dianne Lomax Cohen, the plaintiff,...
Reaffirming the Reasonable Person Standard in Custody Determinations: Analysis of STATE of Tennessee v. Joe L. Anderson

Reaffirming the Reasonable Person Standard in Custody Determinations: Analysis of STATE of Tennessee v. Joe L. Anderson

Date: Sep 17, 1996
Reaffirming the Reasonable Person Standard in Custody Determinations: Analysis of STATE of Tennessee v. Joe L. Anderson Introduction STATE of Tennessee v. Joe L. Anderson is a pivotal case decided by...
Exclusion of Repossession Activities from the Tennessee Consumer Protection Act: Purcell v. First American National Bank

Exclusion of Repossession Activities from the Tennessee Consumer Protection Act: Purcell v. First American National Bank

Date: Sep 17, 1996
Exclusion of Repossession Activities from the Tennessee Consumer Protection Act: Purcell v. First American National Bank Introduction Purcell v. First American National Bank is a landmark decision by...
Defining Aggravating and Mitigating Circumstances in Capital Sentencing: Tennessee v. Richard Odom

Defining Aggravating and Mitigating Circumstances in Capital Sentencing: Tennessee v. Richard Odom

Date: Sep 10, 1996
Defining Aggravating and Mitigating Circumstances in Capital Sentencing: Tennessee v. Richard Odom Introduction In the landmark case of STATE of Tennessee v. Richard Odom (928 S.W.2d 18, 1996), the...
Tidwell v. State of Tennessee: Reinforcing the Necessity of Offense Election to Uphold Fair Trial Standards

Tidwell v. State of Tennessee: Reinforcing the Necessity of Offense Election to Uphold Fair Trial Standards

Date: Jul 9, 1996
Tidwell v. State of Tennessee: Reinforcing the Necessity of Offense Election to Uphold Fair Trial Standards Introduction Tidwell v. State of Tennessee (922 S.W.2d 497, 1996) serves as a pivotal case...
Precision in Jury Instructions: A Comprehensive Analysis of STATE of Tennessee v. Da

Precision in Jury Instructions: A Comprehensive Analysis of STATE of Tennessee v. Da

Date: Jul 9, 1996
Precision in Jury Instructions: A Comprehensive Analysis of STATE of Tennessee v. Da Introduction The case of STATE of Tennessee v. Da (926 S.W.2d 727), adjudicated by the Supreme Court of Tennessee...
Clarification of Rule 404(b) in Sexual Offense Cases: Tennessee Supreme Court in State of Tennessee v. McCary

Clarification of Rule 404(b) in Sexual Offense Cases: Tennessee Supreme Court in State of Tennessee v. McCary

Date: Jul 9, 1996
Clarification of Rule 404(b) in Sexual Offense Cases: Tennessee Supreme Court in State of Tennessee v. McCary Introduction In the landmark case of State of Tennessee v. Donald C. McCary, adjudicated...
Expanded Remedies in Inverse Condemnation and Class Action Proceedings: Analysis of Meighan v. U.S. Sprint Communications Company

Expanded Remedies in Inverse Condemnation and Class Action Proceedings: Analysis of Meighan v. U.S. Sprint Communications Company

Date: Jul 2, 1996
Expanded Remedies in Inverse Condemnation and Class Action Proceedings: Analysis of Meighan v. U.S. Sprint Communications Company Introduction Meighan v. U.S. Sprint Communications Company, 924...
Overruling the "Angry Wife" Exception: State of Tennessee v. Charles William Bartram

Overruling the "Angry Wife" Exception: State of Tennessee v. Charles William Bartram

Date: Jun 25, 1996
Overruling the "Angry Wife" Exception: State of Tennessee v. Charles William Bartram Introduction In the landmark case of State of Tennessee v. Charles William Bartram, the Supreme Court of Tennessee...
Clarifying the Law of Removal in Child Custody: Gene V. AABY v. Judy E. Aaby Strange

Clarifying the Law of Removal in Child Custody: Gene V. AABY v. Judy E. Aaby Strange

Date: Jun 25, 1996
Clarifying the Law of Removal in Child Custody: Gene V. AABY v. Judy E. Aaby Strange Introduction The case of Gene V. AABY, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Judy E. Aaby STRANGE, Defendant-Appellant (924...
Application of the Exclusionary Rule to Extended Detention Under Tenn. R. Crim. P. 5(a): Tennessee v. Huddleston

Application of the Exclusionary Rule to Extended Detention Under Tenn. R. Crim. P. 5(a): Tennessee v. Huddleston

Date: Jun 18, 1996
Application of the Exclusionary Rule to Extended Detention Under Tenn. R. Crim. P. 5(a): Tennessee v. Huddleston Introduction Tennessee v. Huddleston is a landmark case adjudicated by the Supreme...
Media Intervention and Protective Orders: Insights from Ballard v. Herzke et al.

Media Intervention and Protective Orders: Insights from Ballard v. Herzke et al.

Date: Jun 11, 1996
Media Intervention and Protective Orders: Insights from Ballard v. Herzke et al. Introduction The Supreme Court of Tennessee's decision in Ballard v. Herzke et al., 924 S.W.2d 652 (Tenn. 1996), marks...
Sealed Presentments and the Right to a Speedy Trial: Tennessee Supreme Court Establishes Precedent

Sealed Presentments and the Right to a Speedy Trial: Tennessee Supreme Court Establishes Precedent

Date: May 7, 1996
Sealed Presentments and the Right to a Speedy Trial: Tennessee Supreme Court Establishes Precedent Introduction The case of State of Tennessee v. Terry E. Wood addresses a critical issue concerning...
Supreme Court of Tennessee Establishes Rigorous Standards for Sexual Harassment Claims in Academic Settings

Supreme Court of Tennessee Establishes Rigorous Standards for Sexual Harassment Claims in Academic Settings

Date: Apr 30, 1996
Supreme Court of Tennessee Establishes Rigorous Standards for Sexual Harassment Claims in Academic Settings Introduction In the landmark case of Dr. Powell D. McClellan v. The Board of Regents of the...
Clarifying the Application of Sentencing Enhancement Factor (7) in Aggravated Sexual Battery: State v. Kissinger and State v. Roberson

Clarifying the Application of Sentencing Enhancement Factor (7) in Aggravated Sexual Battery: State v. Kissinger and State v. Roberson

Date: Apr 30, 1996
Clarifying the Application of Sentencing Enhancement Factor (7) in Aggravated Sexual Battery: State v. Kissinger and State v. Roberson Introduction State of Tennessee v. Michael R. Kissinger and...
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