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

Impact of Uniformed Security on Fair Trial Rights: Holbrook v. Flynn

Impact of Uniformed Security on Fair Trial Rights: Holbrook v. Flynn

Date: Mar 27, 1986
Impact of Uniformed Security on Fair Trial Rights: Holbrook v. Flynn Introduction Holbrook, Superintendent, Massachusetts Correctional Institution, et al. v. Flynn (475 U.S. 560, 1986) addresses the...
Uniformity and Religious Freedom: Analyzing Goldman v. Weinberger

Uniformity and Religious Freedom: Analyzing Goldman v. Weinberger

Date: Mar 26, 1986
Uniformity and Religious Freedom: Analyzing Goldman v. Weinberger Introduction Goldman v. Weinberger, 475 U.S. 503 (1986), is a pivotal Supreme Court case that addresses the tension between military...
Appellate Standing of Individual School Board Members Affirmed in BENDER v. WILLIAMSPORT AREA SCHOOL DISTrict

Appellate Standing of Individual School Board Members Affirmed in BENDER v. WILLIAMSPORT AREA SCHOOL DISTrict

Date: Mar 26, 1986
Appellate Standing of Individual School Board Members Affirmed in BENDER v. WILLIAMSPORT AREA SCHOOL DISTrict Introduction In the landmark case of Bender et al. v. Williamsport Area School District...
PEMBAUR v. CITY OF CINCINNATI: Establishing Single-Decision Policy for §1983 Liability under Monell

PEMBAUR v. CITY OF CINCINNATI: Establishing Single-Decision Policy for §1983 Liability under Monell

Date: Mar 26, 1986
PEMBAUR v. CITY OF CINCINNATI: Establishing Single-Decision Policy for §1983 Liability under Monell Introduction PEMBAUR v. CITY OF CINCINNATI et al. (475 U.S. 469, 1986) marks a significant turning...
Moran v. Burbine: Affirming the Validity of Miranda Waivers Despite Attorney Communication Omissions

Moran v. Burbine: Affirming the Validity of Miranda Waivers Despite Attorney Communication Omissions

Date: Mar 11, 1986
Moran v. Burbine: Affirming the Validity of Miranda Waivers Despite Attorney Communication Omissions Introduction Moran, Superintendent, Rhode Island Department of Corrections v. Burbine, 475 U.S....
EXXON CORP. v. HUNT: Establishing Federal Preemption over State Environmental Taxation

EXXON CORP. v. HUNT: Establishing Federal Preemption over State Environmental Taxation

Date: Mar 11, 1986
Exxon Corp. ET AL. v. Hunt: Establishing Federal Preemption over State Environmental Taxation Introduction Exxon Corp. ET AL. v. Hunt, Administrator of New Jersey Spill Compensation Fund ET AL., 475...
Exhaustion of State Remedies in Federal Habeas Corpus: Insights from Kemp v. Potts

Exhaustion of State Remedies in Federal Habeas Corpus: Insights from Kemp v. Potts

Date: Mar 11, 1986
Exhaustion of State Remedies in Federal Habeas Corpus: Insights from Kemp v. Potts Introduction Kemp v. Potts (475 U.S. 1068, 1986) is a pivotal case addressing the procedural prerequisites for...
UNITED STATES v. INADI: Setting New Precedent on the Co-Conspirator Exception and the Confrontation Clause

UNITED STATES v. INADI: Setting New Precedent on the Co-Conspirator Exception and the Confrontation Clause

Date: Mar 11, 1986
UNITED STATES v. INADI: Setting New Precedent on the Co-Conspirator Exception and the Confrontation Clause Introduction UNITED STATES v. INADI is a landmark Supreme Court case that addresses the...
Qualified Immunity in Warrant Applications: Insights from Malley v. Briggs

Qualified Immunity in Warrant Applications: Insights from Malley v. Briggs

Date: Mar 6, 1986
Qualified Immunity in Warrant Applications: Insights from Malley v. Briggs Introduction The landmark case of Malley et al. v. Briggs et al., 475 U.S. 335 (1986), addressed the scope of immunity...
Whitley v. Albers: Defining Eighth Amendment Standards for Prison Use of Force

Whitley v. Albers: Defining Eighth Amendment Standards for Prison Use of Force

Date: Mar 5, 1986
Whitley v. Albers: Defining Eighth Amendment Standards for Prison Use of Force Introduction Whitley, Individually and as Assistant Superintendent, Oregon State Penitentiary, et al. v. Albers (475...
Hudson v. Chicago Teachers Union: Enhancing Procedural Safeguards in Agency Shop Agreements

Hudson v. Chicago Teachers Union: Enhancing Procedural Safeguards in Agency Shop Agreements

Date: Mar 5, 1986
Hudson v. Chicago Teachers Union: Enhancing Procedural Safeguards in Agency Shop Agreements Introduction The Supreme Court case Chicago Teachers Union, Local No. 1, AFT, AFL-CIO, et al. v. Hudson et...
Unilateral Government Rent Controls Not Preempted by Sherman Act: FISHER v. CITY OF BERKELEY

Unilateral Government Rent Controls Not Preempted by Sherman Act: FISHER v. CITY OF BERKELEY

Date: Feb 27, 1986
Unilateral Government Rent Controls Not Preempted by Sherman Act: FISHER v. CITY OF BERKELEY Introduction Fisher et al. v. City of Berkeley, California, et al. (475 U.S. 260, 1986) is a landmark...
Clarifying the Pearce Presumption: Insights from Texas v. McCullough

Clarifying the Pearce Presumption: Insights from Texas v. McCullough

Date: Feb 27, 1986
Clarifying the Pearce Presumption: Insights from Texas v. McCullough Introduction Texas v. McCullough, 475 U.S. 134 (1986), represents a significant Supreme Court decision that refined the...
Double Jeopardy and Lesser Included Offenses: Supreme Court's Decision in MATHEWS v. MARSHALL

Double Jeopardy and Lesser Included Offenses: Supreme Court's Decision in MATHEWS v. MARSHALL

Date: Feb 27, 1986
Double Jeopardy and Lesser Included Offenses: Supreme Court's Decision in MATHEWS v. MARSHALL Introduction MATHEWS v. MARSHALL is a landmark decision by the United States Supreme Court, delivered on...
Withdrawal Liability Under MPPAA Does Not Constitute a Taking Under the Fifth Amendment

Withdrawal Liability Under MPPAA Does Not Constitute a Taking Under the Fifth Amendment

Date: Feb 27, 1986
Withdrawal Liability Under the Multiemployer Pension Plan Amendments Act of 1980 (MPPAA) Does Not Constitute a Taking Under the Fifth Amendment Introduction The Supreme Court case Connolly et al.,...
Attorney's Refusal to Support Perjured Testimony Upholds Sixth Amendment: NIX v. WHITESIDE

Attorney's Refusal to Support Perjured Testimony Upholds Sixth Amendment: NIX v. WHITESIDE

Date: Feb 27, 1986
Attorney's Refusal to Support Perjured Testimony Upholds Sixth Amendment: NIX, WARDEN v. WHITESIDE Introduction NIX, WARDEN v. WHITESIDE, 475 U.S. 157 (1986), is a landmark United States Supreme...
Supreme Court Limits NLRB's Authority on Union Affiliation Elections: NLRB v. Financial Institution Employees of America

Supreme Court Limits NLRB's Authority on Union Affiliation Elections: NLRB v. Financial Institution Employees of America

Date: Feb 27, 1986
Supreme Court Limits NLRB's Authority on Union Affiliation Elections Introduction NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD v. FINANCIAL INSTITUTION EMPLOYEES OF AMERICA, LOCAL 1182, 475 U.S. 192 (1986), is a...
National Labor Relations Act Pre-empts State Debarment Statutes: Analysis of Wisconsin v. Gould Inc.

National Labor Relations Act Pre-empts State Debarment Statutes: Analysis of Wisconsin v. Gould Inc.

Date: Feb 27, 1986
National Labor Relations Act Pre-empts State Debarment Statutes: Analysis of Wisconsin v. Gould Inc. Introduction Wisconsin Department of Industry, Labor and Human Relations et al. v. Gould Inc., 475...
Forced Dissemination of Opposing Views in Utility Billing Envelopes: PGE v. Public Utilities Commission of California

Forced Dissemination of Opposing Views in Utility Billing Envelopes: PGE v. Public Utilities Commission of California

Date: Feb 26, 1986
Forced Dissemination of Opposing Views in Utility Billing Envelopes: PGE v. Public Utilities Commission of California Introduction In the landmark case Pacific Gas Electric Co. v. Public Utilities...
Renton v. Playtime Theatres: Affirming Content-Neutral Zoning Regulations on Secondary Effects

Renton v. Playtime Theatres: Affirming Content-Neutral Zoning Regulations on Secondary Effects

Date: Feb 26, 1986
Renton v. Playtime Theatres: Affirming Content-Neutral Zoning Regulations on Secondary Effects Introduction Case Citation: CITY OF RENTON ET AL. v. PLAYTIME THEATRES, INC., ET AL. (475 U.S. 41, 1986)...
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