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

Government Entrapment in Child Pornography Cases: The Jacobson v. United States Decision

Government Entrapment in Child Pornography Cases: The Jacobson v. United States Decision

Date: Apr 7, 1992
Government Entrapment in Child Pornography Cases: The Jacobson v. United States Decision Introduction Jacobson v. United States, 503 U.S. 540 (1992) is a landmark decision by the United States...
Trevino v. Texas: Reinforcing BATSON v. KENTUCKY in Equal Protection Claims

Trevino v. Texas: Reinforcing BATSON v. KENTUCKY in Equal Protection Claims

Date: Apr 7, 1992
Trevino v. Texas: Reinforcing BATSON v. KENTUCKY in Equal Protection Claims Introduction Parties Involved: Petitioner: Joe Mario Trevino Respondent: State of Texas Case Background: In Trevino v....
Clarifying Physical Takings: Supreme Court in YEE ET AL. v. CITY OF ESCONDIDO

Clarifying Physical Takings: Supreme Court in YEE ET AL. v. CITY OF ESCONDIDO

Date: Apr 2, 1992
Clarifying Physical Takings: Supreme Court in YEE ET AL. v. CITY OF ESCONDIDO Introduction In YEE ET AL. v. CITY OF ESCONDIDO, CALIFORNIA, 503 U.S. 519 (1992), the United States Supreme Court...
Upholding Congressional Apportionment Authority: Affirmation of the Equal Proportions Method

Upholding Congressional Apportionment Authority: Affirmation of the Equal Proportions Method

Date: Apr 1, 1992
Upholding Congressional Apportionment Authority: Affirmation of the Equal Proportions Method Introduction In United States Department of Commerce, et al. v. Montana, et al. (503 U.S. 442, 1992), the...
Incremental Judicial Oversight in School Desegregation: Analyzing Freeman v. Pitts

Incremental Judicial Oversight in School Desegregation: Analyzing Freeman v. Pitts

Date: Apr 1, 1992
Incremental Judicial Oversight in School Desegregation: Analyzing Freeman v. Pitts Introduction Freeman et al. v. Pitts et al. (503 U.S. 467, 1992) is a landmark decision by the United States Supreme...
Distinguishing Substantive and Conspiratorial Offenses under Double Jeopardy: An Analysis of United States v. Felix

Distinguishing Substantive and Conspiratorial Offenses under Double Jeopardy: An Analysis of United States v. Felix

Date: Mar 26, 1992
Distinguishing Substantive and Conspiratorial Offenses under Double Jeopardy: An Analysis of United States v. Felix Introduction United States v. Felix, 503 U.S. 378 (1992), is a pivotal Supreme...
Date of Honor Rule Established for §547(b) Preference Actions in Bankruptcy

Date of Honor Rule Established for §547(b) Preference Actions in Bankruptcy

Date: Mar 26, 1992
Date of Honor Rule Established for §547(b) Preference Actions in Bankruptcy Introduction BARNHILL v. JOHNSON, TRUSTEE, 503 U.S. 393 (1992), represents a pivotal decision by the United States Supreme...
Congressional Authority to Amend Environmental Laws: Robertson v. Seattle Audubon Society

Congressional Authority to Amend Environmental Laws: Robertson v. Seattle Audubon Society

Date: Mar 26, 1992
Congressional Authority to Amend Environmental Laws: Robertson v. Seattle Audubon Society Introduction Case Citation: Robertson, Chief, United States Forest Service v. Seattle Audubon Society et al.,...
NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION v. BOSTON MAINE CORPORATION: Expanding Amtrak's Condemnation Authority

NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION v. BOSTON MAINE CORPORATION: Expanding Amtrak's Condemnation Authority

Date: Mar 26, 1992
NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION v. BOSTON MAINE CORPORATION: Expanding Amtrak's Condemnation Authority Introduction NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION v. BOSTON MAINE CORPORATION, 503...
Private Enforcement of Federal Child Welfare Statutes: Insights from Suter v. Artist M. et al.

Private Enforcement of Federal Child Welfare Statutes: Insights from Suter v. Artist M. et al.

Date: Mar 26, 1992
Private Enforcement of Federal Child Welfare Statutes: Insights from Suter v. Artist M. et al. Introduction In Suter et al. v. Artist M. et al., 503 U.S. 347 (1992), the United States Supreme Court...
United States v. R.L.C.: Establishing Juvenile Sentencing Maximums Under the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines

United States v. R.L.C.: Establishing Juvenile Sentencing Maximums Under the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines

Date: Mar 25, 1992
United States v. R.L.C.: Establishing Juvenile Sentencing Maximums Under the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Introduction United States v. R.L.C., 503 U.S. 291 (1992), is a pivotal Supreme Court decision...
Defining 'Employee' under ERISA: Insights from Nationwide Mutual Insurance Co. v. Darden

Defining 'Employee' under ERISA: Insights from Nationwide Mutual Insurance Co. v. Darden

Date: Mar 25, 1992
Defining 'Employee' under ERISA: Insights from Nationwide Mutual Insurance Co. v. Darden Introduction The United States Supreme Court case Nationwide Mutual Insurance Co. v. Darden, 502 U.S. 905...
Proximate Cause Requirement for Standing under RICO: HOLMES v. SIPC

Proximate Cause Requirement for Standing under RICO: HOLMES v. SIPC

Date: Mar 25, 1992
Proximate Cause Requirement for Standing under RICO: HOLMES v. SIPC Introduction HOLMES v. SECURITIES INVESTOR PROTECTION CORPORATION ET AL. (503 U.S. 258, 1992) is a landmark United States Supreme...
Authority over Detention Credit Computation in Federal Sentencing: A Commentary on UNITED STATES v. WILSON

Authority over Detention Credit Computation in Federal Sentencing: A Commentary on UNITED STATES v. WILSON

Date: Mar 25, 1992
Authority over Detention Credit Computation in Federal Sentencing: A Commentary on UNITED STATES v. WILSON Introduction UNITED STATES v. WILSON (503 U.S. 329), decided on March 24, 1992, addresses a...
General Motors Corp. v. Romein: Supreme Court Upholds Michigan's Retroactive Workers' Compensation Statute

General Motors Corp. v. Romein: Supreme Court Upholds Michigan's Retroactive Workers' Compensation Statute

Date: Mar 10, 1992
General Motors Corp. v. Romein: Supreme Court Upholds Michigan's Retroactive Workers' Compensation Statute Introduction The case of General Motors Corp. et al. v. Romein et al., decided by the United...
Williams v. United States: Appellate Review of Sentencing Departures Based on Mixed Factors

Williams v. United States: Appellate Review of Sentencing Departures Based on Mixed Factors

Date: Mar 10, 1992
Williams v. United States: Appellate Review of Sentencing Departures Based on Mixed Factors Introduction Williams v. United States, 503 U.S. 193 (1992), is a landmark Supreme Court case that...
Protecting Defendants' Associational Rights: The Landmark Decision in Dawson v. Delaware

Protecting Defendants' Associational Rights: The Landmark Decision in Dawson v. Delaware

Date: Mar 10, 1992
Protecting Defendants' Associational Rights: The Landmark Decision in Dawson v. Delaware Introduction Dawson v. Delaware, 503 U.S. 159 (1992), is a pivotal United States Supreme Court case that...
Connecticut National Bank v. Germain: Interlocutory Appeals in Bankruptcy Proceedings Under 28 U.S.C. §1292

Connecticut National Bank v. Germain: Interlocutory Appeals in Bankruptcy Proceedings Under 28 U.S.C. §1292

Date: Mar 10, 1992
Connecticut National Bank v. Germain: Interlocutory Appeals in Bankruptcy Proceedings Under 28 U.S.C. §1292 Introduction Connecticut National Bank v. Germain Trustee for the Estate of O'Sullivan's...
Stringer v. Black: Clarifying the Applicability of Vague Aggravating Factors in Death Penalty Sentencing under the Eighth Amendment

Stringer v. Black: Clarifying the Applicability of Vague Aggravating Factors in Death Penalty Sentencing under the Eighth Amendment

Date: Mar 10, 1992
Stringer v. Black: Clarifying the Applicability of Vague Aggravating Factors in Death Penalty Sentencing under the Eighth Amendment Introduction Stringer v. Black, 503 U.S. 222 (1992), is a pivotal...
Exemption from Exhaustion Requirement in Bivens Actions for Monetary Damages: McCARTHY v. MADDIGAN

Exemption from Exhaustion Requirement in Bivens Actions for Monetary Damages: McCARTHY v. MADDIGAN

Date: Mar 5, 1992
Exemption from Exhaustion Requirement in Bivens Actions for Monetary Damages Introduction McCARTHY v. MADDIGAN et al. (503 U.S. 140, 1992) is a landmark decision by the United States Supreme Court...
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