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

PERS of Ohio v. Betts: Defining the Scope of §4(f)(2) Under the ADEA

PERS of Ohio v. Betts: Defining the Scope of §4(f)(2) Under the ADEA

Date: Jun 24, 1989
PERS of Ohio v. Betts: Defining the Scope of §4(f)(2) Under the ADEA Introduction The Supreme Court case Public Employees Retirement System of Ohio v. Betts (492 U.S. 158, 1989) marks a significant...
United States Department of Justice v. Tax Analysts: Expanding FOIA Access to Agency-Controlled Court Decisions

United States Department of Justice v. Tax Analysts: Expanding FOIA Access to Agency-Controlled Court Decisions

Date: Jun 24, 1989
United States Department of Justice v. Tax Analysts: Expanding FOIA Access to Agency-Controlled Court Decisions Introduction United States Department of Justice v. Tax Analysts (492 U.S. 136) is a...
Sable Communications v. FCC: Narrowing the Scope of Indecent Speech Regulation

Sable Communications v. FCC: Narrowing the Scope of Indecent Speech Regulation

Date: Jun 24, 1989
Sable Communications v. FCC: Narrowing the Scope of Indecent Speech Regulation Introduction Sable Communications of California, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission (492 U.S. 115, 1989) is a...
States Not Constitutionally Required to Appoint Counsel for Indigent Death Row Inmates: An Analysis of Murray v. Giarratano

States Not Constitutionally Required to Appoint Counsel for Indigent Death Row Inmates: An Analysis of Murray v. Giarratano

Date: Jun 24, 1989
States Not Constitutionally Required to Appoint Counsel for Indigent Death Row Inmates: An Analysis of Murray v. Giarratano Introduction Murray v. Giarratano, 492 U.S. 1 (1989), is a landmark Supreme...
Independent Federation of Flight Attendants v. Zipes: Limiting Attorney's Fees Against Blameless Intervenors under Title VII

Independent Federation of Flight Attendants v. Zipes: Limiting Attorney's Fees Against Blameless Intervenors under Title VII

Date: Jun 23, 1989
Independent Federation of Flight Attendants v. Zipes: Limiting Attorney's Fees Against Blameless Intervenors under Title VII Introduction Independent Federation of Flight Attendants v. Zipes et al.,...
No Exemption for Attorney's Fees under Criminal Forfeiture Statute Affirmed

No Exemption for Attorney's Fees under Criminal Forfeiture Statute Affirmed

Date: Jun 23, 1989
No Exemption for Attorney's Fees under Criminal Forfeiture Statute Affirmed Introduction Caplin Drysdale, Chartered v. United States, 491 U.S. 617 (1989) is a pivotal Supreme Court decision...
Harte-Hanks v. Connaughton: Reinforcing the Actual Malice Standard in Public Figure Libel Cases

Harte-Hanks v. Connaughton: Reinforcing the Actual Malice Standard in Public Figure Libel Cases

Date: Jun 23, 1989
Harte-Hanks Communications, Inc. v. Connaughton: Reinforcing the Actual Malice Standard in Public Figure Libel Cases Introduction Harte-Hanks Communications, Inc. v. Connaughton (491 U.S. 657) is a...
Supreme Court Establishes §1983 as Sole Federal Remedy for §1981 Violations, Rejecting Respondeat Superior for Municipal Entities

Supreme Court Establishes §1983 as Sole Federal Remedy for §1981 Violations, Rejecting Respondeat Superior for Municipal Entities

Date: Jun 23, 1989
Supreme Court Establishes §1983 as Sole Federal Remedy for §1981 Violations, Rejecting Respondeat Superior for Municipal Entities Introduction In JETT v. DALLAS INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTrict, 491 U.S....
Mandatory Forfeiture of Assets Under §853: Insights from United States v. Monsanto

Mandatory Forfeiture of Assets Under §853: Insights from United States v. Monsanto

Date: Jun 23, 1989
Mandatory Forfeiture of Assets Under §853: Insights from United States v. Monsanto Introduction In United States v. Monsanto, 491 U.S. 600 (1989), the United States Supreme Court addressed pivotal...
Regulating Sound Amplification in Public Forums: Ward v. Rock Against Racism

Regulating Sound Amplification in Public Forums: Ward v. Rock Against Racism

Date: Jun 23, 1989
Regulating Sound Amplification in Public Forums: Ward v. Rock Against Racism Introduction Ward et al. v. Rock Against Racism (491 U.S. 781, 1989) is a pivotal Supreme Court case that addresses the...
Massachusetts v. Oakes: Clarifying Overbreadth in Child Nudity Statutes

Massachusetts v. Oakes: Clarifying Overbreadth in Child Nudity Statutes

Date: Jun 22, 1989
Massachusetts v. Oakes: Clarifying Overbreadth in Child Nudity Statutes Introduction Massachusetts v. Oakes is a landmark case decided by the U.S. Supreme Court on June 21, 1989. The case revolves...
PLE Railroad Co. v. Railway Labor Executives' Association: Supreme Court Resolves RLA and ICA Conflicts in Railroad Asset Sales

PLE Railroad Co. v. Railway Labor Executives' Association: Supreme Court Resolves RLA and ICA Conflicts in Railroad Asset Sales

Date: Jun 22, 1989
PLE Railroad Co. v. Railway Labor Executives' Association: Supreme Court Resolves RLA and ICA Conflicts in Railroad Asset Sales Introduction Pittsburgh Lake Erie Railroad Co. v. Railway Labor...
Imposing Civil Damages for Publishing Victim's Name Violates First Amendment: The Florida Star v. B. J. F.

Imposing Civil Damages for Publishing Victim's Name Violates First Amendment: The Florida Star v. B. J. F.

Date: Jun 22, 1989
Imposing Civil Damages for Publishing Victim's Name Violates First Amendment: The Florida Star v. B. J. F. Introduction The Florida Star v. B. J. F. is a pivotal United States Supreme Court case...
Establishing Standards for In Camera Review of Attorney-Client Communications in Crime-Fraud Exception: Insights from UNITED STATES v. ZOLIN ET AL.

Establishing Standards for In Camera Review of Attorney-Client Communications in Crime-Fraud Exception: Insights from UNITED STATES v. ZOLIN ET AL.

Date: Jun 22, 1989
Establishing Standards for In Camera Review of Attorney-Client Communications in Crime-Fraud Exception: Insights from UNITED STATES v. ZOLIN ET AL. Introduction UNITED STATES v. ZOLIN ET AL., 491...
Texas v. Johnson: Affirming Flag Burning as Protected Speech Under the First Amendment

Texas v. Johnson: Affirming Flag Burning as Protected Speech Under the First Amendment

Date: Jun 22, 1989
Texas v. Johnson: Affirming Flag Burning as Protected Speech Under the First Amendment Introduction Texas v. Johnson, 491 U.S. 397 (1989), is a seminal United States Supreme Court case that...
FACA's Applicability to Judicial Nomination Advisers: Public Citizen v. DOJ

FACA's Applicability to Judicial Nomination Advisers: Public Citizen v. DOJ

Date: Jun 22, 1989
FACA's Applicability to Judicial Nomination Advisers: Public Citizen v. DOJ Introduction Public Citizen v. United States Department of Justice et al., 491 U.S. 440 (1989), is a landmark United States...
Federal Judicial Intervention in Utility Ratemaking: New Precedent from New Orleans Public Service, Inc. v. Council of New Orleans

Federal Judicial Intervention in Utility Ratemaking: New Precedent from New Orleans Public Service, Inc. v. Council of New Orleans

Date: Jun 20, 1989
Federal Judicial Intervention in Utility Ratemaking: New Precedent from New Orleans Public Service, Inc. v. Council of New Orleans Introduction The Supreme Court case New Orleans Public Service, Inc....
Double Jeopardy and Multiple Sentences: Insights from Jones v. Thomas

Double Jeopardy and Multiple Sentences: Insights from Jones v. Thomas

Date: Jun 20, 1989
Double Jeopardy and Multiple Sentences: Insights from Jones v. Thomas 1. Introduction The Supreme Court case Jones, Superintendent, Missouri Training Center for Men at Moberly v. Thomas, 491 U.S. 376...
Establishing Standards for 'Minor Disputes' in Railway Labor Relations: A Comprehensive Analysis of Consolidated Rail Corp. v. Railway Labor Executives' Association (1989)

Establishing Standards for 'Minor Disputes' in Railway Labor Relations: A Comprehensive Analysis of Consolidated Rail Corp. v. Railway Labor Executives' Association (1989)

Date: Jun 20, 1989
Establishing Standards for 'Minor Disputes' in Railway Labor Relations: A Comprehensive Analysis of Consolidated Rail Corp. v. Railway Labor Executives' Association (1989) Introduction The case of...
Connecticut’s Beer-Price Affirmation Law and the Commerce Clause: A Comprehensive Analysis of Healy v. Beer Institute

Connecticut’s Beer-Price Affirmation Law and the Commerce Clause: A Comprehensive Analysis of Healy v. Beer Institute

Date: Jun 20, 1989
Connecticut’s Beer-Price Affirmation Law and the Commerce Clause: A Comprehensive Analysis of Healy v. Beer Institute Introduction The case of Healy et al. v. The Beer Institute et al. examined 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