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.
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:
Claim the judgments where you have appeared by linking them directly to your profile and maintain a record of your body of work.
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.
“Exclusive” No More? McLaughlin Chiropractic Associates, Inc. v. McKesson Corp. and the Re-Opening of District-Court Review under the Hobbs Act 1. Introduction On 20 June 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court...
Stanley v. City of Sanford (2025): The Supreme Court Imposes a Temporal Boundary on Who Qualifies as a “Qualified Individual” under ADA Title I 1. Introduction Stanley v. City of Sanford, 606 U.S....
Beyond the Job: Stanley v. City of Sanford and the Temporal Limits of “Qualified Individual” Status Under the ADA Introduction Stanley v. City of Sanford, 606 U.S. ___ (2025), is the Supreme Court’s...
From Local Petitions to National Venue: The Supreme Court’s Two-Step Test for the Clean Air Act’s “Nationwide Scope or Effect” Exception I. Introduction EPA v. Calumet Shreveport Refining, L.L.C.,...
“Only Applicants and Successful Intervenors May Sue”: Supreme Court Tightens the Hobbs Act’s “Party Aggrieved” Test in NRC v. Texas (2025) Introduction In Nuclear Regulatory Commission et al. v....
Oklahoma v. EPA: Individual SIP Disapprovals Are Regionally Reviewable – Refining the Venue Framework Under CAA §7607(b)(1) 1. Introduction In Oklahoma v. Environmental Protection Agency, 605 U.S....
“Intertwined-Issue Jury Right” — Perttu v. Richards Recasts the PLRA Exhaustion Debate 1 Introduction Perttu v. Richards, 605 U.S. ___ (2025), is the Supreme Court’s first major encounter with the...
Transgender Treatment Bans and Equal Protection: United States v. Skrmetti (2025) Sets the Rational-Basis Benchmark Introduction In United States v. Skrmetti, No. 23-477 (June 18 2025), the U.S....
“One Standard for All” – The Supreme Court Abolishes the “Bad-Faith or Gross-Misjudgment” Hurdle in ADA & §504 Education Cases Introduction In A. J. T. v. Osseo Area Schools, Indep. Sch. Dist....
“When the Levy Vanishes, So Does Jurisdiction” – Commissioner v. Zuch and the New Limits on Tax Court Review under 26 U.S.C. § 6330 I. Introduction Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Zuch, 605 U.S....
Narrowing the FTCA Exceptions: Martin v. United States (2025) Clarifies the Limited Reach of the “Law-Enforcement Proviso” and Eliminates the Eleventh Circuit’s Supremacy-Clause Defense I....
The Forward-Relation Doctrine Extended: No Second Notice Required After Reopening Appeal Time under 28 U.S.C. §2107(c) Introduction Parrish v. United States (605 U.S. ___ (2025)) is the Supreme...
“Final-Judgment Finality” – Rivers v. Guerrero Settles When a Habeas Filing Becomes “Second or Successive” under AEDPA Introduction Rivers v. Guerrero, 605 U.S. ___ (2025), resolves a long-standing...
“Beyond Magic Words” – Soto v. United States (2025) and the Re-Configuration of the Barring Act’s “Another Law” Exception Introduction In Soto v. United States, 605 U.S. ___ (2025), a unanimous...
SSA v. AFSCME (605 U.S. ____ (2025)): The Supreme Court Softens the Irreparable-Harm Requirement for Governmental Stay Applications 1. Introduction SSA v. AFSCME concerns an “emergency-docket”...
From Motivation to Function: The Supreme Court’s Denominational-Neutrality Test for Religious-Employer Exemptions 1. Introduction On 5 June 2025 the United States Supreme Court delivered a unanimous...
Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services: The Supreme Court Abolishes the “Background-Circumstances” Hurdle for Majority-Group Plaintiffs under Title VII Introduction In Ames v. Ohio Department of...
“Extraordinary Means Extraordinary”: The Supreme Court Re-cements the Rigid Threshold for Rule 60(b)(6) Motions and Rejects Any Balancing with Rule 15(a) 1. Introduction In BLOM Bank SAL v....
“Automatic Personal Jurisdiction” under the FSIA: CC/Devas (Mauritius) Ltd. & Devas Multimedia Pvt. Ltd. v. Antrix Corp. Ltd. (U.S. 2025) I. Introduction The Supreme Court’s unanimous opinion in...
No Proselytization Requirement: The U.S. Supreme Court Refines the Denominational-Neutrality Rule in Religious Employer Exemptions Introduction In Catholic Charities Bureau, Inc. v. Wisconsin Labor &...