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

Good-Faith Belief in Patent Invalidity Not a Defense in Induced Infringement

Good-Faith Belief in Patent Invalidity Not a Defense in Induced Infringement

Date: Apr 1, 2015
Good-Faith Belief in Patent Invalidity Not a Defense in Induced Infringement Introduction The Supreme Court case COMMIL USA, LLC v. CISCO SYSTEMS, INC. (135 S. Ct. 1920) addresses a pivotal issue in...
Reaffirming AEDPA Standards: Woods v. Donald and the Limits of Cronic in Ineffective Assistance Claims

Reaffirming AEDPA Standards: Woods v. Donald and the Limits of Cronic in Ineffective Assistance Claims

Date: Mar 31, 2015
Reaffirming AEDPA Standards: Woods v. Donald and the Limits of Cronic in Ineffective Assistance Claims Introduction In Woods v. Donald, 575 U.S. 312 (2015), the U.S. Supreme Court addressed the...
Ke v. Brumfield: Reevaluating AEDPA's Standards for Atkins Claims

Ke v. Brumfield: Reevaluating AEDPA's Standards for Atkins Claims

Date: Mar 31, 2015
Ke v. Brumfield: Reevaluating AEDPA's Standards for Atkins Claims Introduction In the landmark case of Ke v. Brumfield, 135 S. Ct. 2269 (2015), the United States Supreme Court addressed critical...
Supreme Court Mandates Cost Consideration in EPA's Regulation of Power Plants under the Clean Air Act

Supreme Court Mandates Cost Consideration in EPA's Regulation of Power Plants under the Clean Air Act

Date: Mar 26, 2015
Supreme Court Mandates Cost Consideration in EPA's Regulation of Power Plants under the Clean Air Act Introduction In the landmark case Michigan, et al. v. Environmental Protection Agency, et al.,...
Alabama Legislative Black Caucus v. Alabama: Redefining Racial Gerrymandering Standards

Alabama Legislative Black Caucus v. Alabama: Redefining Racial Gerrymandering Standards

Date: Mar 26, 2015
Alabama Legislative Black Caucus v. Alabama: Redefining Racial Gerrymandering Standards Introduction In Alabama Legislative Black Caucus, et al. v. Alabama et al., 575 U.S. 254 (2015), the United...
Supreme Court Clarifies Title VII’s Protection Against Pregnancy Discrimination

Supreme Court Clarifies Title VII’s Protection Against Pregnancy Discrimination

Date: Mar 26, 2015
Supreme Court Clarifies Title VII’s Protection Against Pregnancy Discrimination Introduction Case: Peggy Young, Petitioner v. United Parcel Service, Inc. (UPS) Court: Supreme Court of the United...
Clarifying Liability for Misleading Opinions and Omissions Under Section 11: Omnicare, Inc. v. Laborers District Council Construction Industry Pension Fund

Clarifying Liability for Misleading Opinions and Omissions Under Section 11: Omnicare, Inc. v. Laborers District Council Construction Industry Pension Fund

Date: Mar 25, 2015
Clarifying Liability for Misleading Opinions and Omissions Under Section 11: Omnicare, Inc. v. Laborers District Council Construction Industry Pension Fund Introduction In Omnicare, Inc., et al. v....
Reinforcing Issue Preclusion in Trademark Registration: B & B Hardware, Inc. v. Hargis Industries, Inc.

Reinforcing Issue Preclusion in Trademark Registration: B & B Hardware, Inc. v. Hargis Industries, Inc.

Date: Mar 25, 2015
Reinforcing Issue Preclusion in Trademark Registration: B & B Hardware, Inc. v. Hargis Industries, Inc. Introduction The Supreme Court case B & B Hardware, Inc. v. Hargis Industries, Inc. addresses...
Supreme Court Upholds Dewsnup’s Interpretation of Bankruptcy Code §506(d): Underwater Junior Liens Remain Enforceable

Supreme Court Upholds Dewsnup’s Interpretation of Bankruptcy Code §506(d): Underwater Junior Liens Remain Enforceable

Date: Mar 25, 2015
Supreme Court Upholds Dewsnup’s Interpretation of Bankruptcy Code §506(d): Underwater Junior Liens Remain Enforceable Introduction The Supreme Court case Bank of America, N.A. v. Caulket et al., 135...
Issue Preclusion in Trademark Law: B & B Hardware, Inc. v. Hargis Industries, Inc. Establishes Preclusive Effect of TTAB Decisions

Issue Preclusion in Trademark Law: B & B Hardware, Inc. v. Hargis Industries, Inc. Establishes Preclusive Effect of TTAB Decisions

Date: Mar 25, 2015
Issue Preclusion in Trademark Law: B & B Hardware, Inc. v. Hargis Industries, Inc. Establishes Preclusive Effect of TTAB Decisions Introduction B & B Hardware, Inc. v. Hargis Industries, Inc.,...
Issue Preclusion in Trademark Law: Supreme Court Upholds TTAB Decisions as Binding in Federal Courts

Issue Preclusion in Trademark Law: Supreme Court Upholds TTAB Decisions as Binding in Federal Courts

Date: Mar 25, 2015
Issue Preclusion in Trademark Law: Supreme Court Upholds TTAB Decisions as Binding in Federal Courts Introduction The Supreme Court's decision in B & B Hardware, Inc. v. Hargis Industries, Inc. (575...
Government Speech Doctrine Affirmed in Specialty License Plates: Walker III v. Texas Division, Sons of Confederate Veterans, Inc.

Government Speech Doctrine Affirmed in Specialty License Plates: Walker III v. Texas Division, Sons of Confederate Veterans, Inc.

Date: Mar 24, 2015
Government Speech Doctrine Affirmed in Specialty License Plates: Walker III v. Texas Division, Sons of Confederate Veterans, Inc. Introduction The landmark case Walker III v. Texas Division, Sons of...
Supreme Court Affirms Qualified Immunity for Police in Arresting Armed and Mentally Ill Suspects

Supreme Court Affirms Qualified Immunity for Police in Arresting Armed and Mentally Ill Suspects

Date: Mar 24, 2015
Supreme Court Affirms Qualified Immunity for Police in Arresting Armed and Mentally Ill Suspects Introduction In City and County of San Francisco, California, et al. v. Teresa Sheehan, 135 S. Ct....
Supreme Court Reverses Paralyzed Veterans Doctrine: Agencies Not Required to Follow Notice-and-Comment for Significant Interpretations under APA

Supreme Court Reverses Paralyzed Veterans Doctrine: Agencies Not Required to Follow Notice-and-Comment for Significant Interpretations under APA

Date: Mar 10, 2015
Supreme Court Reverses Paralyzed Veterans Doctrine: Agencies Not Required to Follow Notice-and-Comment for Significant Interpretations under APA Introduction In the landmark case of Thomas E. Perez,...
Amtrak as a Governmental Entity: Implications for Separation of Powers and Regulatory Authority

Amtrak as a Governmental Entity: Implications for Separation of Powers and Regulatory Authority

Date: Mar 10, 2015
Amtrak as a Governmental Entity: Implications for Separation of Powers and Regulatory Authority Introduction The United States Supreme Court, in the landmark case Department of Transportation, et al....
Broadening Comparison Classes in Railroad Tax Discrimination Claims: Alabama Department of Revenue v. CSX Transportation, Inc.

Broadening Comparison Classes in Railroad Tax Discrimination Claims: Alabama Department of Revenue v. CSX Transportation, Inc.

Date: Mar 5, 2015
Broadening Comparison Classes in Railroad Tax Discrimination Claims: Alabama Department of Revenue v. CSX Transportation, Inc. Introduction In Alabama Department of Revenue et al. v. CSX...
Reaffirming the Harmlessness of Procedural Errors in Batson Challenges: Davis v. Ayala Commentary

Reaffirming the Harmlessness of Procedural Errors in Batson Challenges: Davis v. Ayala Commentary

Date: Mar 4, 2015
Reaffirming the Harmlessness of Procedural Errors in Batson Challenges: Davis v. Ayala Commentary Introduction Davis v. Ayala, 135 S. Ct. 2187 (2015), is a landmark Supreme Court decision that...
Direct Marketing Association v. Brohl: Clarifying the Tax Injunction Act's Scope

Direct Marketing Association v. Brohl: Clarifying the Tax Injunction Act's Scope

Date: Mar 4, 2015
Direct Marketing Association v. Brohl: Clarifying the Tax Injunction Act's Scope Introduction In the landmark case Direct Marketing Association v. Brohl, the United States Supreme Court addressed the...
Facial Invalidity of Los Angeles Hotel Record Inspection Ordinance under the Fourth Amendment

Facial Invalidity of Los Angeles Hotel Record Inspection Ordinance under the Fourth Amendment

Date: Mar 4, 2015
Facial Invalidity of Los Angeles Hotel Record Inspection Ordinance under the Fourth Amendment Introduction In the landmark case City of Los Angeles v. Naranjibhai Patel et al., the United States...
Clarifying the Confrontation Clause: Admissibility of Statements to Non-Law Enforcement Agents in Emergency Situations

Clarifying the Confrontation Clause: Admissibility of Statements to Non-Law Enforcement Agents in Emergency Situations

Date: Mar 3, 2015
Clarifying the Confrontation Clause: Admissibility of Statements to Non-Law Enforcement Agents in Emergency Situations Introduction The case of Ohio v. Darius Clark (135 S. Ct. 2173, 2015) addresses...
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