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

Teva v. Sandoz: Establishing the Clear Error Standard for Appellate Review of Factual Findings in Patent Claim Construction

Teva v. Sandoz: Establishing the Clear Error Standard for Appellate Review of Factual Findings in Patent Claim Construction

Date: Jan 21, 2015
Teva v. Sandoz: Establishing the Clear Error Standard for Appellate Review of Factual Findings in Patent Claim Construction Introduction In TEVA Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc., 574 U.S....
Supreme Court Reaffirms State's Lethal Injection Protocol Amid Eighth Amendment Concerns

Supreme Court Reaffirms State's Lethal Injection Protocol Amid Eighth Amendment Concerns

Date: Jan 16, 2015
Supreme Court Reaffirms State's Lethal Injection Protocol Amid Eighth Amendment Concerns Comprehensive Commentary on Charles F. Warner, et al., v. Ke (135 S. Ct. 824) Introduction The case of Charles...
Deportation Due to State Drug-Paraphernalia Conviction: Moones Melloouli v. Loretta E. Lynch

Deportation Due to State Drug-Paraphernalia Conviction: Moones Melloouli v. Loretta E. Lynch

Date: Jan 15, 2015
Deportation Due to State Drug-Paraphernalia Conviction: Moones Melloouli v. Loretta E. Lynch Introduction The Supreme Court case Moones Mellouli v. Loretta E. Lynch, 135 S. Ct. 1980 (2015), addresses...
Jennings v. Stephens: Clarifying Appellate Procedures in Federal Habeas Corpus Relief

Jennings v. Stephens: Clarifying Appellate Procedures in Federal Habeas Corpus Relief

Date: Jan 15, 2015
Jennings v. Stephens: Clarifying Appellate Procedures in Federal Habeas Corpus Relief Introduction Jennings v. Stephens is a landmark decision by the United States Supreme Court, adjudicated on...
T-Mobile South v. City of Roswell: Supreme Court Mandates Transparency in Cell Tower Siting Denials

T-Mobile South v. City of Roswell: Supreme Court Mandates Transparency in Cell Tower Siting Denials

Date: Jan 15, 2015
T-Mobile South v. City of Roswell: Supreme Court Mandates Transparency in Cell Tower Siting Denials Introduction T-Mobile South, LLC v. City of Roswell, Georgia (574 U.S. 293, 2015) is a landmark...
Jesinoski v. Countrywide Home Loans: Clarifying Rescission Rights Under the Truth in Lending Act

Jesinoski v. Countrywide Home Loans: Clarifying Rescission Rights Under the Truth in Lending Act

Date: Jan 14, 2015
Jesinoski v. Countrywide Home Loans: Clarifying Rescission Rights Under the Truth in Lending Act Introduction Jesinoski v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc. is a landmark decision by the United States...
Supreme Court Clarifies WSLA’s Scope to Criminal Charges Only and Limits First-to-File Bar Duration

Supreme Court Clarifies WSLA’s Scope to Criminal Charges Only and Limits First-to-File Bar Duration

Date: Jan 14, 2015
Supreme Court Clarifies WSLA’s Scope to Criminal Charges Only and Limits First-to-File Bar Duration Introduction In the landmark case of Kellogg Brown & Root Services, Inc., et al., Petitioners v....
Judicial Review of EEOC's Conciliation Efforts under Title VII

Judicial Review of EEOC's Conciliation Efforts under Title VII

Date: Jan 14, 2015
Judicial Review of EEOC's Conciliation Efforts under Title VII Introduction In MACH MINING, LLC v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 135 S. Ct. 1645 (2015), the United States Supreme Court...
Strict Scrutiny Applied to Content-Based Sign Regulations: Analysis of Reed v. Town of Gilbert

Strict Scrutiny Applied to Content-Based Sign Regulations: Analysis of Reed v. Town of Gilbert

Date: Jan 13, 2015
Strict Scrutiny Applied to Content-Based Sign Regulations: Analysis of Reed v. Town of Gilbert Introduction Reed v. Town of Gilbert is a landmark Supreme Court case decided on January 12, 2015. The...
Natural Gas Act and State Antitrust Claims: A Comprehensive Commentary on ONEOK, Inc. v. Learjet, Inc.

Natural Gas Act and State Antitrust Claims: A Comprehensive Commentary on ONEOK, Inc. v. Learjet, Inc.

Date: Jan 13, 2015
Natural Gas Act Does Not Pre-empt State Antitrust Claims Impacting Retail Prices Introduction In ONEOK, Inc., et al. v. Learjet, Inc., et al. (135 S. Ct. 1591, 2015), the U.S. Supreme Court addressed...
UNITED STATES v. CALIFORNIA: Finalization and Immobilization of Offshore Submerged Lands Boundary

UNITED STATES v. CALIFORNIA: Finalization and Immobilization of Offshore Submerged Lands Boundary

Date: Dec 16, 2014
UNITED STATES v. CALIFORNIA: Finalization and Immobilization of Offshore Submerged Lands Boundary Introduction The landmark case of United States of America v. State of California addresses the...
Dart Cherokee Basin Operating Company v. Owens: Simplifying Removal Requirements Under CAFA

Dart Cherokee Basin Operating Company v. Owens: Simplifying Removal Requirements Under CAFA

Date: Dec 16, 2014
Dart Cherokee Basin Operating Company v. Owens: Simplifying Removal Requirements Under CAFA Introduction In Dart Cherokee Basin Operating Company, LLC, et al., Petitioners v. Brandon W. Owens (574...
Reasonable Mistake of Law Can Justify Fourth Amendment Seizure: Heien v. North Carolina

Reasonable Mistake of Law Can Justify Fourth Amendment Seizure: Heien v. North Carolina

Date: Dec 16, 2014
Reasonable Mistake of Law Can Justify Fourth Amendment Seizure: Heien v. North Carolina Introduction Nicholas Brady Heien v. North Carolina, 574 U.S. 54 (2014), is a landmark decision by the United...
Equitable Tolling in Federal Tort Claims: United States v. Kwai Fun Wong

Equitable Tolling in Federal Tort Claims: United States v. Kwai Fun Wong

Date: Dec 11, 2014
Equitable Tolling in Federal Tort Claims: United States v. Kwai Fun Wong Introduction United States v. Kwai Fun Wong is a pivotal Supreme Court decision that addresses the applicability of equitable...
Supreme Court Clarifies FLSA on Postshift Security Screenings: Integrity Staffing Solutions, Inc. v. Busk

Supreme Court Clarifies FLSA on Postshift Security Screenings: Integrity Staffing Solutions, Inc. v. Busk

Date: Dec 10, 2014
Supreme Court Clarifies Fair Labor Standards Act on Postshift Security Screenings Introduction The case of Integrity Staffing Solutions, Inc. v. Jesse Busk et al. addressed a pivotal issue concerning...
Supreme Court Affirms Federal Rule of Evidence 606(b) in Warger v. Shauers

Supreme Court Affirms Federal Rule of Evidence 606(b) in Warger v. Shauers

Date: Dec 10, 2014
Supreme Court Affirms Federal Rule of Evidence 606(b) in Warger v. Shauers Introduction Gregory P. Warger v. Randy D. Shauers, 574 U.S. 40 (2014), presents a pivotal moment in the interpretation and...
Preserving Appellate Rights in Multidistrict Pretrial Consolidations: Gelboim v. Bank of America

Preserving Appellate Rights in Multidistrict Pretrial Consolidations: Gelboim v. Bank of America

Date: Dec 10, 2014
Preserving Appellate Rights in Multidistrict Pretrial Consolidations: Gelboim v. Bank of America Introduction The case of Ellen Gelboim, et al. v. Bank of America Corporation et al. (135 S.Ct. 897,...
State Tax Discrimination Against Rail Carriers: Alabama v. CSX Transportation

State Tax Discrimination Against Rail Carriers: Alabama v. CSX Transportation

Date: Dec 10, 2014
State Tax Discrimination Against Rail Carriers: Alabama v. CSX Transportation Introduction The case of Alabama Department of Revenue v. CSX Transportation, Inc. revolved around the interpretation of...
Direct Marketing Association v. Barbara Brohl: Reinterpreting the Tax Injunction Act

Direct Marketing Association v. Barbara Brohl: Reinterpreting the Tax Injunction Act

Date: Dec 9, 2014
Direct Marketing Association v. Barbara Brohl: Reinterpreting the Tax Injunction Act Introduction Direct Marketing Association v. Barbara Brohl is a pivotal Supreme Court case decided on December 8,...
Amtrak as a Governmental Entity: Implications for Separation of Powers and Nondelegation Doctrine

Amtrak as a Governmental Entity: Implications for Separation of Powers and Nondelegation Doctrine

Date: Dec 9, 2014
Amtrak as a Governmental Entity: Implications for Separation of Powers and Nondelegation Doctrine Introduction Department of Transportation, et al. v. Association of American Railroads, 135 S. Ct....
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