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

Reckless Assaults as Misdemeanor Crimes of Domestic Violence Under §922(g)(9): Voisine v. United States

Reckless Assaults as Misdemeanor Crimes of Domestic Violence Under §922(g)(9): Voisine v. United States

Date: Jun 28, 2016
Reckless Assaults as Misdemeanor Crimes of Domestic Violence Under §922(g)(9): Voisine v. United States Introduction In Stephen L. Voisine and William E. Armstrong, III, Petitioners v. United States,...
Reaffirming the Undue Burden Standard: Comprehensive Analysis of Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt

Reaffirming the Undue Burden Standard: Comprehensive Analysis of Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt

Date: Jun 28, 2016
Reaffirming the Undue Burden Standard: Comprehensive Analysis of Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt Introduction Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt, 136 S. Ct. 2292 (2016), is a landmark decision...
Fourth Amendment Implications of Implied Consent Laws in DUI Cases

Fourth Amendment Implications of Implied Consent Laws in DUI Cases

Date: Jun 24, 2016
Fourth Amendment Implications of Implied Consent Laws in DUI Cases Introduction The Supreme Court case Danny Birchfield, Petitioner v. North Dakota, along with related petitions William Robert...
Reaffirming the Elements-Only Categorical Approach in ACCA: Insights from Mathis v. United States

Reaffirming the Elements-Only Categorical Approach in ACCA: Insights from Mathis v. United States

Date: Jun 24, 2016
Reaffirming the Elements-Only Categorical Approach in ACCA: Insights from Mathis v. United States Introduction Mathis v. United States, 136 S. Ct. 2243 (2016), is a landmark decision by the U.S....
Strict Scrutiny and Race-Conscious Admissions: Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin

Strict Scrutiny and Race-Conscious Admissions: Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin

Date: Jun 24, 2016
Strict Scrutiny and Race-Conscious Admissions: Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin Introduction Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin is a landmark case decided by the United States Supreme...
Attenuation Doctrine Refined: Admissibility of Evidence Following Unlawful Stops in Utah v. Strieff (2016)

Attenuation Doctrine Refined: Admissibility of Evidence Following Unlawful Stops in Utah v. Strieff (2016)

Date: Jun 21, 2016
Attenuation Doctrine Refined: Admissibility of Evidence Following Unlawful Stops in Utah v. Strieff (2016) Introduction Utah v. Strieff, 136 S. Ct. 2056 (2016), is a landmark case adjudicated by the...
Cuozzo v. Lee: Finality of Inter Partes Review Institution and Broadest Reasonable Construction Affirmed

Cuozzo v. Lee: Finality of Inter Partes Review Institution and Broadest Reasonable Construction Affirmed

Date: Jun 21, 2016
Cuozzo v. Lee: Finality of Inter Partes Review Institution and Broadest Reasonable Construction Affirmed Introduction In Cuozzo Speed Technologies, LLC v. Michelle K. Lee, 136 S. Ct. 2131 (2016), the...
Encino Motorcars v. Navarro: Limits on Chevron Deference in FLSA Exemption Interpretation

Encino Motorcars v. Navarro: Limits on Chevron Deference in FLSA Exemption Interpretation

Date: Jun 21, 2016
Encino Motorcars v. Navarro: Limits on Chevron Deference in FLSA Exemption Interpretation Introduction Encino Motorcars, LLC v. Hector Navarro, 136 S. Ct. 2117 (2016), is a pivotal Supreme Court...
Affirming the Commerce Element in Hobbs Act Robberies Targeting Drug Dealers

Affirming the Commerce Element in Hobbs Act Robberies Targeting Drug Dealers

Date: Jun 21, 2016
Affirming the Commerce Element in Hobbs Act Robberies Targeting Drug Dealers Introduction In David Anthony Taylor v. United States, 136 S. Ct. 2074 (2016), the United States Supreme Court addressed...
RICO's Private Right of Action and Extraterritoriality: Insights from RJR Nabisco, Inc. v. European Community

RICO's Private Right of Action and Extraterritoriality: Insights from RJR Nabisco, Inc. v. European Community

Date: Jun 21, 2016
RICO's Private Right of Action and Extraterritoriality: Insights from RJR Nabisco, Inc. v. European Community Introduction RJR Nabisco, Inc., et al., Petitioners v. European Community, et al., 136 S....
Mandatory Application of the Rule of Two in Federal Contracting: Kingdomware Technologies, Inc. v. United States

Mandatory Application of the Rule of Two in Federal Contracting: Kingdomware Technologies, Inc. v. United States

Date: Jun 17, 2016
Mandatory Application of the Rule of Two in Federal Contracting: Kingdomware Technologies, Inc. v. United States Introduction Kingdomware Technologies, Inc. v. United States, 136 S. Ct. 1969 (2016),...
Kirtsaeng v. Wiley: Reinforcing Objective Reasonableness in Attorney's Fees under 17 U.S.C. §505

Kirtsaeng v. Wiley: Reinforcing Objective Reasonableness in Attorney's Fees under 17 U.S.C. §505

Date: Jun 17, 2016
Kirtsaeng v. Wiley: Reinforcing Objective Reasonableness in Attorney's Fees under 17 U.S.C. §505 Introduction The case of Supap Kirtsaeng, DBA Bluechristine99, v. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. addresses...
Implied False Certification under the False Claims Act: Insights from Universal Health Services, Inc. v. United States

Implied False Certification under the False Claims Act: Insights from Universal Health Services, Inc. v. United States

Date: Jun 17, 2016
Implied False Certification under the False Claims Act: Insights from Universal Health Services, Inc. v. United States Introduction The Supreme Court case Universal Health Services, Inc. v. United...
Supreme Court Revises Standards for Enhanced Damages in Patent Infringement: Halo Electronics, Inc. v. Pulse Electronics, Inc. and Stryker Corporation et al.

Supreme Court Revises Standards for Enhanced Damages in Patent Infringement: Halo Electronics, Inc. v. Pulse Electronics, Inc. and Stryker Corporation et al.

Date: Jun 14, 2016
Supreme Court Revises Standards for Enhanced Damages in Patent Infringement: Halo Electronics, Inc. v. Pulse Electronics, Inc. and Stryker Corporation et al. Introduction The United States Supreme...
Puerto Rico as a "State" Under the Bankruptcy Code: Comprehensive Analysis of Commonwealth of Puerto Rico v. Franklin California Tax-Free Trust

Puerto Rico as a "State" Under the Bankruptcy Code: Comprehensive Analysis of Commonwealth of Puerto Rico v. Franklin California Tax-Free Trust

Date: Jun 14, 2016
Puerto Rico as a "State" Under the Bankruptcy Code: Comprehensive Analysis of Commonwealth of Puerto Rico v. Franklin California Tax-Free Trust Introduction The case of Commonwealth of Puerto Rico,...
Use of Tribal-Court Convictions as Predicate Offenses in Federal Domestic Violence Prosecutions

Use of Tribal-Court Convictions as Predicate Offenses in Federal Domestic Violence Prosecutions

Date: Jun 14, 2016
Use of Tribal-Court Convictions as Predicate Offenses in Federal Domestic Violence Prosecutions Introduction In the landmark case United States v. Michael Bryant, Jr., the U.S. Supreme Court...
Unified Sovereignty in Double Jeopardy: Puerto Rico and the Federal Government

Unified Sovereignty in Double Jeopardy: Puerto Rico and the Federal Government

Date: Jun 10, 2016
Unified Sovereignty in Double Jeopardy: Puerto Rico and the Federal Government Introduction Commonwealth of Puerto Rico v. Luis M. Sanchez Valle, et al. (136 S. Ct. 1863, 2016) is a pivotal U.S....
Inherent Authority to Reempanel Discharged Juries: Rocky Dietz v. Hillary Bouldin

Inherent Authority to Reempanel Discharged Juries: Rocky Dietz v. Hillary Bouldin

Date: Jun 10, 2016
Inherent Authority to Reempanel Discharged Juries: Rocky Dietz v. Hillary Bouldin Introduction Rocky Dietz v. Hillary Bouldin is a pivotal case adjudicated by the United States Supreme Court on June...
Williams v. Pennsylvania: Strengthening Judicial Recusal Standards for Former Prosecutors under Due Process

Williams v. Pennsylvania: Strengthening Judicial Recusal Standards for Former Prosecutors under Due Process

Date: Jun 10, 2016
Williams v. Pennsylvania: Strengthening Judicial Recusal Standards for Former Prosecutors under Due Process Introduction Terrance Williams v. Pennsylvania, 136 S. Ct. 1899 (2016), is a landmark...
Judgment Bar Provision Does Not Apply to FTCA Exceptions: Simmons v. Himmelreich

Judgment Bar Provision Does Not Apply to FTCA Exceptions: Simmons v. Himmelreich

Date: Jun 7, 2016
Judgment Bar Provision Does Not Apply to FTCA Exceptions: Simmons v. Himmelreich Introduction Simmons v. Himmelreich is a significant Supreme Court case decided on June 6, 2016, addressing 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