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

Commerce Clause Violation: Supreme Court Invalidates Michigan's Waste Import Restrictions

Commerce Clause Violation: Supreme Court Invalidates Michigan's Waste Import Restrictions

Date: Jun 2, 1992
Commerce Clause Violation: Supreme Court Invalidates Michigan's Waste Import Restrictions Introduction FORT GRATIOT SANITARY LANDFILL, INC. v. MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES ET AL. is a...
Preemption of State Fare Advertising Regulations under the Airline Deregulation Act: Morales v. TWA

Preemption of State Fare Advertising Regulations under the Airline Deregulation Act: Morales v. TWA

Date: Jun 2, 1992
Preemption of State Fare Advertising Regulations under the Airline Deregulation Act: Morales v. TWA Introduction Morales, Attorney General of Texas v. Trans World Airlines, Inc., et al. (504 U.S....
Chemical Waste Management v. Hunt: Commerce Clause Violation in Hazardous Waste Regulation

Chemical Waste Management v. Hunt: Commerce Clause Violation in Hazardous Waste Regulation

Date: Jun 2, 1992
Chemical Waste Management v. Hunt: Commerce Clause Violation in Hazardous Waste Regulation Introduction Chemical Waste Management, Inc. v. Hunt, Governor of Alabama, et al., 504 U.S. 334 (1992), is a...
Enhancing Sentencing Standards: Insights from Larry Kinder v. United States

Enhancing Sentencing Standards: Insights from Larry Kinder v. United States

Date: May 27, 1992
Enhancing Sentencing Standards: Insights from Larry Kinder v. United States Introduction Larry Kinder v. United States, 504 U.S. 946 (1992), presents a critical examination of sentencing procedures...
Backpay Awards under Title VII Not Excludable from Gross Income

Backpay Awards under Title VII Not Excludable from Gross Income

Date: May 27, 1992
Backpay Awards under Title VII Not Excludable from Gross Income Introduction United States v. Burke et al. (504 U.S. 229, 1992) is a landmark decision by the United States Supreme Court addressing...
EVANS v. UNITED STATES: Affirmation of Passive Bribe Acceptance Under the Hobbs Act

EVANS v. UNITED STATES: Affirmation of Passive Bribe Acceptance Under the Hobbs Act

Date: May 27, 1992
EVANS v. UNITED STATES: Affirmation of Passive Bribe Acceptance Under the Hobbs Act Introduction The Supreme Court case of EVANS v. UNITED STATES (504 U.S. 255, 1992) marks a significant decision in...
Quill Corp. v. North Dakota: Establishing Modern Nexus Standards for State Taxation on Out-of-State Mail-Order Sellers

Quill Corp. v. North Dakota: Establishing Modern Nexus Standards for State Taxation on Out-of-State Mail-Order Sellers

Date: May 27, 1992
Quill Corp. v. North Dakota: Establishing Modern Nexus Standards for State Taxation on Out-of-State Mail-Order Sellers Introduction In the landmark case of Quill Corp. v. North Dakota, decided by the...
Burson v. Freeman: Upholding Campaign-Free Zones as Constitutional

Burson v. Freeman: Upholding Campaign-Free Zones as Constitutional

Date: May 27, 1992
Burson v. Freeman: Upholding Campaign-Free Zones as Constitutional Introduction Burson, Attorney General and Reporter for Tennessee v. Freeman (504 U.S. 191, 1992) is a landmark Supreme Court case...
FOUCHA v. LOUISIANA: Re-defining Due Process Protections for Insanity Acquittees

FOUCHA v. LOUISIANA: Re-defining Due Process Protections for Insanity Acquittees

Date: May 19, 1992
FOUCHA v. LOUISIANA: Re-defining Due Process Protections for Insanity Acquittees 1. Introduction FOUCHA v. LOUISIANA is a landmark United States Supreme Court decision rendered on May 18, 1992,...
WYATT v. COLE et al.: Private Defendants and Qualified Immunity under §1983

WYATT v. COLE et al.: Private Defendants and Qualified Immunity under §1983

Date: May 19, 1992
WYATT v. COLE et al.: Private Defendants and Qualified Immunity under §1983 Introduction WYATT v. COLE et al., 504 U.S. 158 (1992), is a landmark decision by the United States Supreme Court that...
Riggins v. Nevada: Due Process Protections Against Involuntary Medication During Trial

Riggins v. Nevada: Due Process Protections Against Involuntary Medication During Trial

Date: May 19, 1992
Riggins v. Nevada: Due Process Protections Against Involuntary Medication During Trial Introduction Riggins v. Nevada (504 U.S. 127, 1992) represents a pivotal moment in constitutional law,...
Authority of Federal District Courts to Review Government's Refusal to File Substantial-Assistance Motions: Analysis of Wade v. United States

Authority of Federal District Courts to Review Government's Refusal to File Substantial-Assistance Motions: Analysis of Wade v. United States

Date: May 19, 1992
Authority of Federal District Courts to Review Government's Refusal to File Substantial-Assistance Motions: Analysis of Wade v. United States Introduction Wade v. United States, 504 U.S. 181 (1992),...
United States v. Williams: Indictments Remain Valid Despite Prosecutors' Failure to Present Exculpatory Evidence to Grand Jury

United States v. Williams: Indictments Remain Valid Despite Prosecutors' Failure to Present Exculpatory Evidence to Grand Jury

Date: May 5, 1992
United States v. Williams: Indictments Remain Valid Despite Prosecutors' Failure to Present Exculpatory Evidence to Grand Jury Introduction United States v. Williams, 504 U.S. 36 (1992), is a pivotal...
Expanding Court Discretion in Dismissing In Forma Pauperis Frivolous Complaints: DENTON v. HERNANDEZ

Expanding Court Discretion in Dismissing In Forma Pauperis Frivolous Complaints: DENTON v. HERNANDEZ

Date: May 5, 1992
Expanding Court Discretion in Dismissing In Forma Pauperis Frivolous Complaints: DENTON v. HERNANDEZ Introduction Denton, Director of Corrections of California, et al. v. Hernandez is a pivotal 1992...
Keene v. Tamayo-Reyes: Establishing the Cause-and-Prejudice Standard in Habeas Corpus Proceedings

Keene v. Tamayo-Reyes: Establishing the Cause-and-Prejudice Standard in Habeas Corpus Proceedings

Date: May 5, 1992
Keene v. Tamayo-Reyes: Establishing the Cause-and-Prejudice Standard in Habeas Corpus Proceedings Introduction Keene v. Tamayo-Reyes, 504 U.S. 1 (1992), is a landmark decision by the United States...
Broad Discretion of the Secretary of the Army Under the Rivers and Harbors Appropriation Act: UNITED STATES v. ALASKA

Broad Discretion of the Secretary of the Army Under the Rivers and Harbors Appropriation Act: UNITED STATES v. ALASKA

Date: Apr 22, 1992
Broad Discretion of the Secretary of the Army Under the Rivers and Harbors Appropriation Act: UNITED STATES v. ALASKA Introduction UNITED STATES v. ALASKA (503 U.S. 569, 1992) is a landmark decision...
Gomez v. U.S.: Upholding Finality in Execution Proceedings and Limiting Successive §1983 Claims

Gomez v. U.S.: Upholding Finality in Execution Proceedings and Limiting Successive §1983 Claims

Date: Apr 22, 1992
Gomez v. United States: Upholding Finality in Execution Proceedings and Limiting Successive §1983 Claims Introduction The landmark case Gomez et al. v. United States District Court for the Northern...
Kansas Military Retirement Taxation: A Landmark Ruling

Kansas Military Retirement Taxation: A Landmark Ruling

Date: Apr 22, 1992
Kansas Military Retirement Taxation: A Landmark Ruling Introduction Barker et al. v. Kansas et al. (503 U.S. 594, 1992) is a pivotal United States Supreme Court case that addressed the...
TAYLOR v. FREELAND KRONZ: Limits on Bankruptcy Trustees to Challenge Exemptions Post 30-Day Period

TAYLOR v. FREELAND KRONZ: Limits on Bankruptcy Trustees to Challenge Exemptions Post 30-Day Period

Date: Apr 22, 1992
TAYLOR v. FREELAND KRONZ: Limits on Bankruptcy Trustees to Challenge Exemptions Post 30-Day Period Introduction TAYLOR v. FREELAND KRONZ (503 U.S. 638) is a significant Supreme Court decision that...
Clarifying Federal Sovereign Immunity: No Waiver for State Imposed Civil Fines under CWA and RCRA

Clarifying Federal Sovereign Immunity: No Waiver for State Imposed Civil Fines under CWA and RCRA

Date: Apr 22, 1992
Clarifying Federal Sovereign Immunity: No Waiver for State Imposed Civil Fines under CWA and RCRA Introduction In the landmark case of United States Department of Energy v. Ohio et al. (503 U.S. 607,...
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