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

GEORGIA v. SOUTH CAROLINA (1990): Defining Interstate Boundaries and Sovereignty Over Riverine Islands

GEORGIA v. SOUTH CAROLINA (1990): Defining Interstate Boundaries and Sovereignty Over Riverine Islands

Date: Jun 26, 1990
GEORGIA v. SOUTH CAROLINA (1990): Defining Interstate Boundaries and Sovereignty Over Riverine Islands Court: U.S. Supreme Court Date: June 25, 1990 Citation: 497 U.S. 376 Introduction GEORGIA v....
Clarifying Miranda Protections for Inmates: Insights from Bradley v. Ohio

Clarifying Miranda Protections for Inmates: Insights from Bradley v. Ohio

Date: Jun 26, 1990
Clarifying Miranda Protections for Inmates: Insights from Bradley v. Ohio Introduction William J. Bradley v. Ohio (497 U.S. 1011, 1990) presents a critical examination of the application of Miranda...
Ohio v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health: Supreme Court Upholds Parental Notice Requirements for Minor's Abortions

Ohio v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health: Supreme Court Upholds Parental Notice Requirements for Minor's Abortions

Date: Jun 26, 1990
Ohio v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health: Supreme Court Upholds Parental Notice Requirements for Minor's Abortions Introduction Ohio v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health et al. is a landmark...
Unconstitutional Two-Parent Notification in Minor Abortion Laws: Hodgson v. Minnesota

Unconstitutional Two-Parent Notification in Minor Abortion Laws: Hodgson v. Minnesota

Date: Jun 26, 1990
Unconstitutional Two-Parent Notification in Minor Abortion Laws: Hodgson v. Minnesota Introduction Hodgson et al. v. Minnesota et al. (497 U.S. 417, 1990) is a pivotal decision by the United States...
Extending Elrod and Branti: Supreme Court Prohibits Patronage Hiring and Promotion Based on Political Affiliation

Extending Elrod and Branti: Supreme Court Prohibits Patronage Hiring and Promotion Based on Political Affiliation

Date: Jun 22, 1990
Extending Elrod and Branti: Supreme Court Prohibits Patronage Hiring and Promotion Based on Political Affiliation Introduction Rutan et al. v. Republican Party of Illinois et al. is a landmark United...
Kansas et al. v. Utilicorp United Inc.: Establishing Direct Purchaser Standing under Clayton Act §4

Kansas et al. v. Utilicorp United Inc.: Establishing Direct Purchaser Standing under Clayton Act §4

Date: Jun 22, 1990
Kansas et al. v. Utilicorp United Inc.: Establishing Direct Purchaser Standing under Clayton Act §4 Introduction Kansas et al. v. Utilicorp United Inc. (497 U.S. 199, 1990) is a significant Supreme...
Collins v. Youngblood: Redefining Ex Post Facto Protections in Retroactive Procedural Legislation

Collins v. Youngblood: Redefining Ex Post Facto Protections in Retroactive Procedural Legislation

Date: Jun 22, 1990
Collins v. Youngblood: Redefining Ex Post Facto Protections in Retroactive Procedural Legislation Introduction Collins v. Youngblood, 497 U.S. 37 (1990), is a landmark decision by the United States...
Profit Motive Essential for Social Clubs to Offset Unrelated Business Losses Against Investments: Analysis of Portland Golf Club v. Commissioner (1990)

Profit Motive Essential for Social Clubs to Offset Unrelated Business Losses Against Investments: Analysis of Portland Golf Club v. Commissioner (1990)

Date: Jun 22, 1990
Profit Motive Essential for Social Clubs to Offset Unrelated Business Losses Against Investments: Analysis of Portland Golf Club v. Commissioner (1990) Introduction Portland Golf Club v....
Milkovich v. Lorain Journal Co.: Redefining Defamation Standards for Opinion Statements

Milkovich v. Lorain Journal Co.: Redefining Defamation Standards for Opinion Statements

Date: Jun 22, 1990
Milkovich v. Lorain Journal Co.: Redefining Defamation Standards for Opinion Statements Introduction Milkovich v. Lorain Journal Co., 497 U.S. 1 (1990), is a landmark decision by the United States...
Retroactive Application of Caldwell Rule under Teague Doctrine: Analysis of Sawyer v. Smith

Retroactive Application of Caldwell Rule under Teague Doctrine: Analysis of Sawyer v. Smith

Date: Jun 22, 1990
Retroactive Application of Caldwell Rule under Teague Doctrine: Analysis of Sawyer v. Smith Introduction Sawyer v. Smith, Interim Warden, 497 U.S. 227 (1990), is a pivotal United States Supreme Court...
Illinois v. Rodriguez: Upholding Warrantless Entry Based on Reasonable Belief in Third-Party Consent

Illinois v. Rodriguez: Upholding Warrantless Entry Based on Reasonable Belief in Third-Party Consent

Date: Jun 22, 1990
Illinois v. Rodriguez: Upholding Warrantless Entry Based on Reasonable Belief in Third-Party Consent Introduction Illinois v. Rodriguez, 497 U.S. 177 (1990), is a landmark decision by the United...
Strict Enforcement of the Filed Rate Doctrine in Interstate Commerce: Maislin Industries v. Primary Steel

Strict Enforcement of the Filed Rate Doctrine in Interstate Commerce: Maislin Industries v. Primary Steel

Date: Jun 22, 1990
Strict Enforcement of the Filed Rate Doctrine in Interstate Commerce: Maislin Industries v. Primary Steel 1. Introduction Maislin Industries, U.S., Inc. v. Primary Steel, Inc., 497 U.S. 116 (1990) is...
Expansion of Patent Exemptions to Medical Devices under 35 U.S.C. § 271(e)(1): Insights from Eli Lilly Co. v. Medtronic, Inc.

Expansion of Patent Exemptions to Medical Devices under 35 U.S.C. § 271(e)(1): Insights from Eli Lilly Co. v. Medtronic, Inc.

Date: Jun 19, 1990
Expansion of Patent Exemptions to Medical Devices under 35 U.S.C. § 271(e)(1): Insights from Eli Lilly Co. v. Medtronic, Inc. Introduction Eli Lilly Co. v. Medtronic, Inc., 496 U.S. 661 (1990), is a...
Miranda Protections for Testimonial Evidence: A Comprehensive Analysis of Pennsylvania v. Muniz

Miranda Protections for Testimonial Evidence: A Comprehensive Analysis of Pennsylvania v. Muniz

Date: Jun 19, 1990
Miranda Protections for Testimonial Evidence: A Comprehensive Analysis of Pennsylvania v. Muniz Introduction Pennsylvania v. Muniz, 496 U.S. 582 (1990), is a pivotal United States Supreme Court case...
Sullivan v. Finkelstein: Expanding the Appealability of Remand Orders under § 405(g)

Sullivan v. Finkelstein: Expanding the Appealability of Remand Orders under § 405(g)

Date: Jun 19, 1990
Sullivan v. Finkelstein: Expanding the Appealability of Remand Orders under § 405(g) Introduction In Sullivan, Secretary of Health and Human Services v. Finkelstein, 496 U.S. 617 (1990), the United...
Supreme Court Upholds PBGC’s Restoration Authority: Reinforcing Agency Discretion Under ERISA

Supreme Court Upholds PBGC’s Restoration Authority: Reinforcing Agency Discretion Under ERISA

Date: Jun 19, 1990
Supreme Court Upholds PBGC’s Restoration Authority: Reinforcing Agency Discretion Under ERISA Introduction In the landmark case Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation v. The LTV Corp. et al., decided...
Establishing Fourth Amendment Standards for Sobriety Checkpoints: Insights from Michigan Dept. of State Police v. Sitz

Establishing Fourth Amendment Standards for Sobriety Checkpoints: Insights from Michigan Dept. of State Police v. Sitz

Date: Jun 15, 1990
Establishing Fourth Amendment Standards for Sobriety Checkpoints: Insights from Michigan Department of State Police v. Sitz Introduction Michigan Department of State Police v. Sitz (496 U.S. 444,...
Boren Amendment Enforceable Under Section 1983: Supreme Court Affirmation

Boren Amendment Enforceable Under Section 1983: Supreme Court Affirmation

Date: Jun 15, 1990
Boren Amendment Enforceable Under Section 1983: Supreme Court Affirmation Introduction Wilder, Governor of Virginia, et al. v. Virginia Hospital Association (496 U.S. 498, 1990) is a landmark...
Defining 'Child Support' under the AFDC Program: Insights from Sullivan v. Stroop

Defining 'Child Support' under the AFDC Program: Insights from Sullivan v. Stroop

Date: Jun 15, 1990
Defining 'Child Support' under the AFDC Program: Insights from Sullivan v. Stroop Introduction The case of Sullivan, Secretary of Health and Human Services v. Stroop et al., 496 U.S. 478 (1990),...
Texaco Inc. v. Hasbrouck: Defining Limits of Functional Discounts under the Robinson-Patman Act

Texaco Inc. v. Hasbrouck: Defining Limits of Functional Discounts under the Robinson-Patman Act

Date: Jun 15, 1990
Texaco Inc. v. Hasbrouck: Defining Limits of Functional Discounts under the Robinson-Patman Act Introduction Texaco Inc. v. Hasbrouck is a pivotal Supreme Court decision that delves into 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