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

Tax Implications of Continuity of Interest: Insights from PAULSEN ET UX. v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE

Tax Implications of Continuity of Interest: Insights from PAULSEN ET UX. v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE

Date: Jan 9, 1985
Tax Implications of Continuity of Interest: Insights from PAULSEN ET UX. v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE Introduction PAULSEN ET UX. v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE (469 U.S. 131, 1985) is a...
Mills Music, Inc. v. Snyder: Defining Derivative Work Royalties Post-Termination under §304(c)(6)(A)

Mills Music, Inc. v. Snyder: Defining Derivative Work Royalties Post-Termination under §304(c)(6)(A)

Date: Jan 9, 1985
Mills Music, Inc. v. Snyder: Defining Derivative Work Royalties Post-Termination under §304(c)(6)(A) Introduction Mills Music, Inc. v. Snyder is a landmark United States Supreme Court case decided on...
Incontestable Marks: Park'n Fly Establishes Offensive Use in Trademark Enforcement

Incontestable Marks: Park'n Fly Establishes Offensive Use in Trademark Enforcement

Date: Jan 9, 1985
Incontestable Marks: Park'n Fly Establishes Offensive Use in Trademark Enforcement Introduction Park'n Fly, Inc. v. Dollar Park and Fly, Inc., 469 U.S. 189 (1985) is a landmark decision by the United...
Extended Terry Stops: UNITED STATES v. HENSLEY and the Evolution of Investigatory Detentions

Extended Terry Stops: UNITED STATES v. HENSLEY and the Evolution of Investigatory Detentions

Date: Jan 9, 1985
Extended Terry Stops: UNITED STATES v. HENSLEY and the Evolution of Investigatory Detentions Introduction UNITED STATES v. HENSLEY, 469 U.S. 221 (1985), stands as a pivotal Supreme Court decision...
Reevaluating Tolling Statutes and the Commerce Clause: Insights from Honda Motor Company, Ltd. v. Walter P. Coons

Reevaluating Tolling Statutes and the Commerce Clause: Insights from Honda Motor Company, Ltd. v. Walter P. Coons

Date: Jan 8, 1985
Reevaluating Tolling Statutes and the Commerce Clause: Insights from Honda Motor Company, Ltd. v. Walter P. Coons Introduction Honda Motor Company, Ltd. v. Walter P. Coons is a pivotal case that...
Separate Punishments for False Statements and Currency Reporting Violations: Analysis of UNITED STATES v. WOODWARD

Separate Punishments for False Statements and Currency Reporting Violations: Analysis of UNITED STATES v. WOODWARD

Date: Jan 8, 1985
Separate Punishments for False Statements and Currency Reporting Violations: Analysis of UNITED STATES v. WOODWARD Introduction UNITED STATES v. WOODWARD, 469 U.S. 105 (1985), is a seminal Supreme...
Double Jeopardy Protections Prior to Jury Empaneling: Insights from Rodrigo Rodrigues v. Hawaii

Double Jeopardy Protections Prior to Jury Empaneling: Insights from Rodrigo Rodrigues v. Hawaii

Date: Jan 8, 1985
Double Jeopardy Protections Prior to Jury Empaneling: Insights from Rodrigo Rodrigues v. Hawaii Introduction Rodrigo Rodrigues v. Hawaii, 469 U.S. 1078 (1985), is a pivotal case addressing the...
Reaffirmation of the Dunn Rule: Upholding Jury Verdict Consistency in UNITED STATES v. POWELL

Reaffirmation of the Dunn Rule: Upholding Jury Verdict Consistency in UNITED STATES v. POWELL

Date: Dec 11, 1984
Reaffirmation of the Dunn Rule: Upholding Jury Verdict Consistency in UNITED STATES v. POWELL Introduction UNITED STATES v. POWELL, 469 U.S. 57 (1984), is a pivotal case wherein the United States...
Defendant’s Obligation to Testify for Preserving Impeachment Claims: The Luce v. United States Decision

Defendant’s Obligation to Testify for Preserving Impeachment Claims: The Luce v. United States Decision

Date: Dec 11, 1984
Defendant’s Obligation to Testify for Preserving Impeachment Claims: The Luce v. United States Decision Introduction The Supreme Court case Luce v. United States, 469 U.S. 38 (1984), addresses a...
Ensuring Mitigating Evidence in Capital Sentencing: Insights from Jacobs v. Wainwright

Ensuring Mitigating Evidence in Capital Sentencing: Insights from Jacobs v. Wainwright

Date: Dec 11, 1984
Ensuring Mitigating Evidence in Capital Sentencing: Insights from Jacobs v. Wainwright Introduction Jacobs v. Wainwright, 469 U.S. 1062 (1984), is a significant Supreme Court case that addressed the...
United States v. Abel: Affirming the Admittance of Organizational Membership as Evidence of Witness Bias

United States v. Abel: Affirming the Admittance of Organizational Membership as Evidence of Witness Bias

Date: Dec 11, 1984
United States v. Abel: Affirming the Admittance of Organizational Membership as Evidence of Witness Bias Introduction United States v. Abel, 469 U.S. 45 (1984), is a pivotal case decided by the...
Clarifying the Co-Conspirator Exception: Insights from Alvin Means v. United States

Clarifying the Co-Conspirator Exception: Insights from Alvin Means v. United States

Date: Dec 11, 1984
Clarifying the Co-Conspirator Exception: Insights from Alvin Means v. United States Introduction Alvin Means v. United States, 469 U.S. 1058 (1984), addresses pivotal issues surrounding the...
Broadening the Scope of 18 U.S.C. §2114: Protection Extended Beyond Postal Services

Broadening the Scope of 18 U.S.C. §2114: Protection Extended Beyond Postal Services

Date: Dec 11, 1984
Broadening the Scope of 18 U.S.C. §2114: Protection Extended Beyond Postal Services Introduction The Supreme Court case García et al. v. United States, 469 U.S. 70 (1984), addressed the...
Clear Invocation of the Right to Counsel: SMITH v. ILLINOIS Analysis

Clear Invocation of the Right to Counsel: SMITH v. ILLINOIS Analysis

Date: Dec 11, 1984
Clear Invocation of the Right to Counsel: SMITH v. ILLINOIS Analysis Introduction SMITH v. ILLINOIS (469 U.S. 91, 1984) represents a pivotal Supreme Court decision that reinforces the inviolable...
Market Value Standard Affirmed for Public Condemnees under the Fifth Amendment in UNITED STATES v. 50 ACRES OF LAND et al.

Market Value Standard Affirmed for Public Condemnees under the Fifth Amendment in UNITED STATES v. 50 ACRES OF LAND et al.

Date: Dec 5, 1984
Market Value Standard Affirmed for Public Condemnees under the Fifth Amendment in UNITED STATES v. 50 ACRES OF LAND et al. Introduction UNITED STATES v. 50 ACRES OF LAND et al. (469 U.S. 24, 1984) is...
Thompson v. Louisiana: Reinforcing the Fourth Amendment’s Warrant Requirement in Murder Scene Investigations

Thompson v. Louisiana: Reinforcing the Fourth Amendment’s Warrant Requirement in Murder Scene Investigations

Date: Nov 27, 1984
Thompson v. Louisiana: Reinforcing the Fourth Amendment’s Warrant Requirement in Murder Scene Investigations Introduction Thompson v. Louisiana is a landmark 1984 decision by the United States...
Racial Discrimination in Capital Sentencing: Insights from STEPHENS v. KEMP

Racial Discrimination in Capital Sentencing: Insights from STEPHENS v. KEMP

Date: Nov 27, 1984
Racial Discrimination in Capital Sentencing: Insights from STEPHENS v. KEMP Introduction Alpha Otis O'Daniel Stephens v. Ralph Kemp, Superintendent, Georgia Diagnostic & Classification Center, 469...
Affirmation of Voting Rights Act Amendments in Mississippi Republican Executive Committee v. Owen H. Brooks

Affirmation of Voting Rights Act Amendments in Mississippi Republican Executive Committee v. Owen H. Brooks

Date: Nov 14, 1984
Affirmation of Voting Rights Act Amendments in Mississippi Republican Executive Committee v. Owen H. Brooks Introduction Mississippi Republican Executive Committee v. Owen H. Brooks (469 U.S. 1002,...
Revisiting Peremptory Challenges: A Commentary on Bruce H. Thompson v. United States

Revisiting Peremptory Challenges: A Commentary on Bruce H. Thompson v. United States

Date: Nov 14, 1984
Revisiting Peremptory Challenges: A Commentary on Bruce H. Thompson v. United States Introduction Bruce H. Thompson v. United States, decided on November 13, 1984, represents a pivotal moment in the...
Articulable Suspicion in Airport Searches: The Precedent Set in Florida v. Rodriguez

Articulable Suspicion in Airport Searches: The Precedent Set in Florida v. Rodriguez

Date: Nov 14, 1984
Articulable Suspicion in Airport Searches: The Precedent Set in Florida v. Rodriguez Introduction Florida v. Rodriguez (469 U.S. 1, 1984) 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