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

Michigan v. Lucas: Upholding Conditional Rape-Shield Statutes under the Sixth Amendment

Michigan v. Lucas: Upholding Conditional Rape-Shield Statutes under the Sixth Amendment

Date: May 21, 1991
Michigan v. Lucas: Upholding Conditional Rape-Shield Statutes under the Sixth Amendment Introduction Michigan v. Lucas (500 U.S. 145, 1991) is a landmark decision by the United States Supreme Court...
Ensuring Due Process in Capital Sentencing: Insights from Lankford v. Idaho

Ensuring Due Process in Capital Sentencing: Insights from Lankford v. Idaho

Date: May 21, 1991
Ensuring Due Process in Capital Sentencing: Insights from Lankford v. Idaho Introduction Lankford v. Idaho, 500 U.S. 110 (1991), is a landmark Supreme Court decision that addresses the procedural...
Demand Futility in Federal Derivative Actions Governed by State Law: KAMEN v. KEMPER Financial Services

Demand Futility in Federal Derivative Actions Governed by State Law: KAMEN v. KEMPER Financial Services

Date: May 21, 1991
Demand Futility in Federal Derivative Actions Governed by State Law: KAMEN v. KEMPER Financial Services Introduction KAMEN v. KEMPER FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC. ET AL. (500 U.S. 90) is a pivotal U.S....
Clarifying Removal Jurisdiction: Supreme Court Limits 28 U.S.C. §1442(a)(1) to Federal Officers, Not Agencies

Clarifying Removal Jurisdiction: Supreme Court Limits 28 U.S.C. §1442(a)(1) to Federal Officers, Not Agencies

Date: May 21, 1991
Clarifying Removal Jurisdiction: Supreme Court Limits 28 U.S.C. §1442(a)(1) to Federal Officers, Not Agencies Introduction The Supreme Court case International Primate Protection League et al. v....
Upholding Delegated Authority: Touby v. United States and the Non-Delegation Doctrine

Upholding Delegated Authority: Touby v. United States and the Non-Delegation Doctrine

Date: May 21, 1991
Upholding Delegated Authority: Touby et ux. v. United States and the Non-Delegation Doctrine Introduction Touby et ux. v. United States, 500 U.S. 160 (1991), is a landmark Supreme Court case that...
Nonconsensual Magistrate Referrals in Prisoner Petitions: Insights from McCARTHY v. BRONSON

Nonconsensual Magistrate Referrals in Prisoner Petitions: Insights from McCARTHY v. BRONSON

Date: May 21, 1991
Nonconsensual Magistrate Referrals in Prisoner Petitions: Insights from McCARTHY v. BRONSON Introduction The U.S. Supreme Court case McCARTHY v. BRONSON, 500 U.S. 136 (1991), addressed the scope of...
ADEA Claims Subject to Compulsory Arbitration: GILMER v. INTERSTATE/JOHNSON LANE CORP.

ADEA Claims Subject to Compulsory Arbitration: GILMER v. INTERSTATE/JOHNSON LANE CORP.

Date: May 14, 1991
ADEA Claims Subject to Compulsory Arbitration: GILMER v. INTERSTATE/JOHNSON LANE CORP. Introduction GILMER v. INTERSTATE/JOHNSON LANE CORP., 500 U.S. 20 (1991), is a landmark United States Supreme...
Riverside County v. McLaughlin: Establishing the 48-Hour Standard for Probable Cause Determinations

Riverside County v. McLaughlin: Establishing the 48-Hour Standard for Probable Cause Determinations

Date: May 14, 1991
Riverside County v. McLaughlin: Establishing the 48-Hour Standard for Probable Cause Determinations Introduction Riverside County v. McLaughlin, 500 U.S. 44 (1991), is a landmark United States...
Timeliness of Civil Actions Under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act: Insights from Stevens v. Department of Treasury

Timeliness of Civil Actions Under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act: Insights from Stevens v. Department of Treasury

Date: Apr 25, 1991
Timeliness of Civil Actions Under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act: Insights from Stevens v. Department of Treasury Introduction Stevens v. Department of Treasury et al. is a landmark U.S....
NLRB's Authority to Define Bargaining Units: American Hospital Association v. NLRB

NLRB's Authority to Define Bargaining Units: American Hospital Association v. NLRB

Date: Apr 24, 1991
NLRB's Authority to Define Bargaining Units: American Hospital Association v. NLRB U.S. Supreme Court, 499 U.S. 606 (1991) Introduction The case of American Hospital Association v. National Labor...
Clarifying Fourth Amendment Seizure Standards in California v. Hodari D.

Clarifying Fourth Amendment Seizure Standards in California v. Hodari D.

Date: Apr 24, 1991
Clarifying Fourth Amendment Seizure Standards in California v. Hodari D. Introduction California v. Hodari D., decided by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1991, addresses a pivotal question regarding the...
Enforcement of Forum Selection Clauses in Standardized Contracts: Analysis of Carnival Cruise Lines, Inc. v. Shute

Enforcement of Forum Selection Clauses in Standardized Contracts: Analysis of Carnival Cruise Lines, Inc. v. Shute

Date: Apr 18, 1991
Enforcement of Forum Selection Clauses in Standardized Contracts: Analysis of Carnival Cruise Lines, Inc. v. Shute Introduction Carnival Cruise Lines, Inc. v. Shute et vir (499 U.S. 585, 1991) is a...
Strict Interpretation of 'Lesion Corporelle' under the Warsaw Convention: Mental Injury Exclusion in Eastern Airlines, Inc. v. Floyd

Strict Interpretation of 'Lesion Corporelle' under the Warsaw Convention: Mental Injury Exclusion in Eastern Airlines, Inc. v. Floyd

Date: Apr 18, 1991
Strict Interpretation of 'Lesion Corporelle' under the Warsaw Convention: Mental Injury Exclusion in Eastern Airlines, Inc. v. Floyd Introduction In the landmark case of Eastern Airlines, Inc. v....
Material Difference in Property Exchanges: A New Precedent from Cottage Savings Association v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

Material Difference in Property Exchanges: A New Precedent from Cottage Savings Association v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

Date: Apr 18, 1991
Material Difference in Property Exchanges: A New Precedent from Cottage Savings Association v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue Introduction Cottage Savings Association v. Commissioner of Internal...
U.S. v. Centennial Savings Bank: Affirmation of Deductible Mortgage Exchange Losses and Rejection of Early Withdrawal Penalty Income Exclusion

U.S. v. Centennial Savings Bank: Affirmation of Deductible Mortgage Exchange Losses and Rejection of Early Withdrawal Penalty Income Exclusion

Date: Apr 18, 1991
U.S. v. Centennial Savings Bank: Affirmation of Deductible Mortgage Exchange Losses and Rejection of Early Withdrawal Penalty Income Exclusion Introduction In the landmark case United States v....
Leathers v. Medlock: Supreme Court Upholds Differential Taxation of Cable Television Under the First Amendment

Leathers v. Medlock: Supreme Court Upholds Differential Taxation of Cable Television Under the First Amendment

Date: Apr 17, 1991
Leathers v. Medlock: Supreme Court Upholds Differential Taxation of Cable Television Under the First Amendment Introduction Leathers, Commissioner of Revenues of Arkansas v. Medlock et al. is a...
McCLESKEY v. ZANT: Defining Abuse of the Writ in Federal Habeas Corpus Petitions

McCLESKEY v. ZANT: Defining Abuse of the Writ in Federal Habeas Corpus Petitions

Date: Apr 17, 1991
McCLESKEY v. ZANT: Defining Abuse of the Writ in Federal Habeas Corpus Petitions Introduction Case Title: McCLESKEY v. ZANT, Superintendent, Georgia Diagnostic and Classification Center (499 U.S....
Pro Se Attorneys and Attorney's Fees: Insights from KAY v. EHRLER ET AL.

Pro Se Attorneys and Attorney's Fees: Insights from KAY v. EHRLER ET AL.

Date: Apr 17, 1991
Pro Se Attorneys and Attorney's Fees: Insights from KAY v. EHRLER ET AL. Introduction KAY v. EHRLER ET AL. (499 U.S. 432, 1991) is a landmark decision by the United States Supreme Court that...
State Action Immunity in Local Zoning Regulations Under Sherman Act: City of Columbia v. Omni Outdoor Advertising

State Action Immunity in Local Zoning Regulations Under Sherman Act: City of Columbia v. Omni Outdoor Advertising

Date: Apr 2, 1991
State Action Immunity in Local Zoning Regulations Under Sherman Act: City of Columbia v. Omni Outdoor Advertising Introduction City of Columbia v. Omni Outdoor Advertising, Inc., 499 U.S. 365 (1991),...
Equal Protection in Jury Selection: Powers v. Ohio Expands Third-Party Standing to Challenge Racial Exclusions

Equal Protection in Jury Selection: Powers v. Ohio Expands Third-Party Standing to Challenge Racial Exclusions

Date: Apr 2, 1991
Equal Protection in Jury Selection: Powers v. Ohio Expands Third-Party Standing to Challenge Racial Exclusions Introduction Powers v. Ohio, 499 U.S. 400 (1991), marks a significant development in the...
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