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

U.S. Supreme Court Case Commentaries

Holly Farms Corp. v. NLRB: Defining Employee Status for Live-Haul Crews under the NLRA

Holly Farms Corp. v. NLRB: Defining Employee Status for Live-Haul Crews under the NLRA

Date: Apr 24, 1996
Holly Farms Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board: Defining Employee Status for Live-Haul Crews under the NLRA Introduction Holly Farms Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board, 517 U.S. 392 (1996),...
Due Process Protection and the Burden of Proof in Competency Proceedings: Cooper v. Oklahoma

Due Process Protection and the Burden of Proof in Competency Proceedings: Cooper v. Oklahoma

Date: Apr 17, 1996
Due Process Protection and the Burden of Proof in Competency Proceedings: Cooper v. Oklahoma Introduction Cooper v. Oklahoma, 517 U.S. 348 (1996), addresses a critical issue in criminal law: the...
Age Discrimination in Employment: Reversing Prima Facie Requirements under the ADEA

Age Discrimination in Employment: Reversing Prima Facie Requirements under the ADEA

Date: Apr 2, 1996
Age Discrimination in Employment: Reversing Prima Facie Requirements under the ADEA Introduction In O'CONNOR v. CONSOLIDATED COIN CATERERS CORP., the United States Supreme Court addressed a pivotal...
Limitation of Equitable Dismissal in First Federal Habeas Petitions: LONCHAR v. THOMAS, Warden

Limitation of Equitable Dismissal in First Federal Habeas Petitions: LONCHAR v. THOMAS, Warden

Date: Apr 2, 1996
Limitation of Equitable Dismissal in First Federal Habeas Petitions: LONCHAR v. THOMAS, Warden Introduction LONCHAR v. THOMAS, Warden, 517 U.S. 314 (1996), is a pivotal United States Supreme Court...
Expanding Voting Rights Act §5 to Political Party Conventions: Morse v. Republican Party of Virginia

Expanding Voting Rights Act §5 to Political Party Conventions: Morse v. Republican Party of Virginia

Date: Mar 28, 1996
Expanding Voting Rights Act §5 to Political Party Conventions: Morse v. Republican Party of Virginia Introduction Morse et al. v. Republican Party of Virginia et al. (517 U.S. 186, 1996) is a...
Single Punishment Principle in Conspiracy and Continuing Criminal Enterprise Cases: Rutledge v. United States

Single Punishment Principle in Conspiracy and Continuing Criminal Enterprise Cases: Rutledge v. United States

Date: Mar 28, 1996
Single Punishment Principle in Conspiracy and Continuing Criminal Enterprise Cases: Rutledge v. United States Introduction Rutledge v. United States, 517 U.S. 292 (1996), is a seminal case in United...
Seminole Tribe v. Florida: Affirming State Sovereign Immunity under the Eleventh Amendment

Seminole Tribe v. Florida: Affirming State Sovereign Immunity under the Eleventh Amendment

Date: Mar 28, 1996
Sovereign Immunity Under the Eleventh Amendment and the Indian Commerce Clause in Seminole Tribe v. Florida Introduction Seminole Tribe of Florida v. Florida, 517 U.S. 44 (1996), is a landmark...
Federal Preemption of State Insurance Regulations: Barnett Bank v. Florida Insurance Commissioner

Federal Preemption of State Insurance Regulations: Barnett Bank v. Florida Insurance Commissioner

Date: Mar 27, 1996
Federal Preemption of State Insurance Regulations: Barnett Bank v. Florida Insurance Commissioner Introduction Barnett Bank of Marion County, N.A. v. Bill Nelson, Florida Insurance Commissioner, et...
Upholding Executive Discretion in Census Enumeration: Wisconsin v. Oklahoma et al.

Upholding Executive Discretion in Census Enumeration: Wisconsin v. Oklahoma et al.

Date: Mar 21, 1996
Upholding Executive Discretion in Census Enumeration: Wisconsin v. Oklahoma et al. Introduction Wisconsin v. City of New York et al., Oklahoma, 517 U.S. 1 (1996), is a pivotal United States Supreme...
RCRA Limits on Private Cost Recovery: Supreme Court Establishes Boundaries for Citizen Suits

RCRA Limits on Private Cost Recovery: Supreme Court Establishes Boundaries for Citizen Suits

Date: Mar 20, 1996
RCRA Limits on Private Cost Recovery: Supreme Court Establishes Boundaries for Citizen Suits Introduction Meghrig, et al. v. KFC Western, Inc. (516 U.S. 479) is a pivotal Supreme Court decision that...
ERISA §502(a)(3): Individual Right to Equitable Relief Affirmed in Varity Corp. v. Howe

ERISA §502(a)(3): Individual Right to Equitable Relief Affirmed in Varity Corp. v. Howe

Date: Mar 20, 1996
ERISA §502(a)(3): Individual Right to Equitable Relief Affirmed in Varity Corp. v. Howe Introduction Varity Corp. v. Howe et al., 516 U.S. 489 (1996), is a pivotal Supreme Court decision that...
Restricting Implied Indemnification Claims under the Tucker Act: Analysis of Hercules, Inc. v. United States

Restricting Implied Indemnification Claims under the Tucker Act: Analysis of Hercules, Inc. v. United States

Date: Mar 5, 1996
Restricting Implied Indemnification Claims under the Tucker Act: Analysis of Hercules, Inc. v. United States Introduction In Hercules, Inc. et al. v. United States, 516 U.S. 417 (1996), the United...
Bennis v. Michigan: Upholding Strict Forfeiture of Innocent Co-Owner’s Property

Bennis v. Michigan: Upholding Strict Forfeiture of Innocent Co-Owner’s Property

Date: Mar 5, 1996
Bennis v. Michigan: Upholding Strict Forfeiture of Innocent Co-Owner’s Property Introduction Bennis v. Michigan is a pivotal United States Supreme Court case decided on March 4, 1996, that examines...
Full Faith and Credit Applied to State Court Settlements Releasing Exclusively Federal Claims: The Matsushita v. Epstein Decision

Full Faith and Credit Applied to State Court Settlements Releasing Exclusively Federal Claims: The Matsushita v. Epstein Decision

Date: Feb 28, 1996
Full Faith and Credit Applied to State Court Settlements Releasing Exclusively Federal Claims: The Matsushita v. Epstein Decision Introduction In the landmark case of Matsushita Electric Industrial...
Limits on SAA Section 2 Liability: Supreme Court Rules in Norfolk Western v. Hiles

Limits on SAA Section 2 Liability: Supreme Court Rules in Norfolk Western v. Hiles

Date: Feb 28, 1996
Limits on SAA Section 2 Liability: Supreme Court Rules in Norfolk Western v. Hiles Introduction NORFOLK WESTERN RAILWAY CO. v. HILES (516 U.S. 400) is a pivotal 1996 Supreme Court decision that...
BEHRENS v. PELLETIER: Clarifying the Limits of Qualified Immunity Appeals

BEHRENS v. PELLETIER: Clarifying the Limits of Qualified Immunity Appeals

Date: Feb 22, 1996
BEHRENS v. PELLETIER: Clarifying the Limits of Qualified Immunity Appeals Introduction BEHRENS v. PELLETIER, 516 U.S. 299 (1996), is a landmark decision by the United States Supreme Court that...
Dormant Commerce Clause Reinforced: Unconstitutional Intangibles Tax in Fulton Corp. v. Faulkner

Dormant Commerce Clause Reinforced: Unconstitutional Intangibles Tax in Fulton Corp. v. Faulkner

Date: Feb 22, 1996
Dormant Commerce Clause Reinforced: Unconstitutional Intangibles Tax in Fulton Corp. v. Faulkner Introduction Fulton Corp. v. Faulkner, Secretary of Revenue of North Carolina is a landmark decision...
PEACOCK v. THOMAS: Federal Courts Lack Ancillary Jurisdiction to Impose Liability on Third Parties for ERISA Judgments

PEACOCK v. THOMAS: Federal Courts Lack Ancillary Jurisdiction to Impose Liability on Third Parties for ERISA Judgments

Date: Feb 22, 1996
PEACOCK v. THOMAS: Federal Courts Lack Ancillary Jurisdiction to Impose Liability on Third Parties for ERISA Judgments Introduction Peacock v. Thomas, 516 U.S. 349 (1996), is a landmark U.S. Supreme...
Neal v. United States: Upholding Statutory Interpretation Over Sentencing Guidelines for LSD Trafficking

Neal v. United States: Upholding Statutory Interpretation Over Sentencing Guidelines for LSD Trafficking

Date: Jan 23, 1996
Neal v. United States: Upholding Statutory Interpretation Over Sentencing Guidelines for LSD Trafficking Introduction Neal v. United States is a landmark decision by the United States Supreme Court,...
Expansion of Federal Jurisdiction Under the Expedited Funds Availability Act: Insights from Bank One Chicago v. Midwest Bank Trust Co.

Expansion of Federal Jurisdiction Under the Expedited Funds Availability Act: Insights from Bank One Chicago v. Midwest Bank Trust Co.

Date: Jan 18, 1996
Expansion of Federal Jurisdiction Under the Expedited Funds Availability Act: Insights from Bank One Chicago, N.A. v. Midwest Bank Trust Co. Introduction The Supreme Court case Bank One Chicago, N.A....
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