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

Supreme Court Establishes Strict Criteria for State-Action Antitrust Immunity in Regulatory Boards

Supreme Court Establishes Strict Criteria for State-Action Antitrust Immunity in Regulatory Boards

Date: Oct 15, 2014
Supreme Court Establishes Strict Criteria for State-Action Antitrust Immunity in Regulatory Boards Introduction In North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners v. Federal Trade Commission, 135...
Equitable Enforcement of Interstate Water Compacts: Kansas v. Nebraska and Colorado

Equitable Enforcement of Interstate Water Compacts: Kansas v. Nebraska and Colorado

Date: Oct 15, 2014
Equitable Enforcement of Interstate Water Compacts: Kansas v. Nebraska and Colorado 1. Introduction Kansas v. Nebraska and Colorado, 135 S.Ct. 1042 (2014), represents a significant judicial...
FLSA Compensation Limits: Supreme Court Rules Postshift Security Screenings Non-Compensable

FLSA Compensation Limits: Supreme Court Rules Postshift Security Screenings Non-Compensable

Date: Oct 9, 2014
FLSA Compensation Limits: Supreme Court Rules Postshift Security Screenings Non-Compensable Introduction In Integrity Staffing Solutions, Inc. v. Jesse Busk et al., 135 S.Ct. 513 (2014), the United...
Rule 606(b) Precludes Use of Juror Affidavits to Challenge Verdict Based on Voir Dire Dishonesty

Rule 606(b) Precludes Use of Juror Affidavits to Challenge Verdict Based on Voir Dire Dishonesty

Date: Oct 9, 2014
Rule 606(b) Precludes Use of Juror Affidavits to Challenge Verdict Based on Voir Dire Dishonesty Introduction Gregory P. Warger v. Randy D. Shauers, 135 S.Ct. 521 (2014), is a pivotal United States...
RLUIPA Strengthened: Supreme Court Upholds Inmate’s Right to Religious Grooming

RLUIPA Strengthened: Supreme Court Upholds Inmate’s Right to Religious Grooming

Date: Oct 8, 2014
RLUIPA Strengthened: Supreme Court Upholds Inmate’s Right to Religious Grooming Introduction In Gregory Houston Holt, aka Abdul Maalik Muhammad, Petitioner v. Ray Hobbs (135 S.Ct. 853), the United...
Plausible Allegation Suffices for Removal Notices Under CAFA: Dart Cherokee Basin Oper. Co. v. Owens

Plausible Allegation Suffices for Removal Notices Under CAFA: Dart Cherokee Basin Oper. Co. v. Owens

Date: Oct 8, 2014
Plausible Allegation Suffices for Removal Notices Under CAFA: Dart Cherokee Basin Oper. Co. v. Owens Introduction Dart Cherokee Basin Operating Company, LLC, et al. v. Brandon W. Owens (135 S.Ct....
Heien v. North Carolina: Reasonable Mistakes of Law and Fourth Amendment Seizures

Heien v. North Carolina: Reasonable Mistakes of Law and Fourth Amendment Seizures

Date: Oct 7, 2014
Heien v. North Carolina: Reasonable Mistakes of Law and Fourth Amendment Seizures Introduction Heien v. North Carolina, 135 S. Ct. 530 (2014), is a landmark decision by the United States Supreme...
Clear Notice Requirement in Aiding-and-Affetting Theories: Lopez v. Mar

Clear Notice Requirement in Aiding-and-Affetting Theories: Lopez v. Mar

Date: Oct 7, 2014
Clear Notice Requirement in Aiding-and-Affetting Theories: Lopez v. Mar Analysis Introduction Lopez v. Mar, 574 U.S. 1 (2014), is a seminal case in federal habeas corpus jurisprudence. The case...
Supreme Court Grants Temporary Exemption for Religious Nonprofits from ACA's Contraceptive Coverage Mandate

Supreme Court Grants Temporary Exemption for Religious Nonprofits from ACA's Contraceptive Coverage Mandate

Date: Jul 4, 2014
Supreme Court Grants Temporary Exemption for Religious Nonprofits from ACA's Contraceptive Coverage Mandate Introduction In the landmark case Wheaton College v. Sylvia Burwell (2014), the United...
RFRA Protections for For-Profit Corporations: Comprehensive Commentary on Syl v. Burwell (2014)

RFRA Protections for For-Profit Corporations: Comprehensive Commentary on Syl v. Burwell (2014)

Date: Jul 1, 2014
RFRA Protections for For-Profit Corporations: Comprehensive Commentary on Syl v. Burwell (2014) Introduction Syl v. Burwell is a landmark decision by the United States Supreme Court that...
First Amendment Limits on Agency Fees for In-Home Care Personal Assistants: A New SCOTUS Precedent

First Amendment Limits on Agency Fees for In-Home Care Personal Assistants: A New SCOTUS Precedent

Date: Jul 1, 2014
First Amendment Limits on Agency Fees for In-Home Care Personal Assistants: A New SCOTUS Precedent Introduction In the landmark case Pamela Harris et al. v. Pat Quinn, Governor of Illinois, et al.,...
Supreme Court Establishes RFRA Protections for Closely Held For-Profit Corporations: Burwell v. Hobby Lobby

Supreme Court Establishes RFRA Protections for Closely Held For-Profit Corporations: Burwell v. Hobby Lobby

Date: Jul 1, 2014
Supreme Court Establishes RFRA Protections for Closely Held For-Profit Corporations: Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Introduction Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., et al. and Conestoga Wood Specialties...
NLRB v. Canning: Defining the Scope and Duration of Presidential Recess Appointments

NLRB v. Canning: Defining the Scope and Duration of Presidential Recess Appointments

Date: Jun 27, 2014
NLRB v. Canning: Defining the Scope and Duration of Presidential Recess Appointments Introduction In NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD v. NOEL CANNING (573 U.S. 513, 2014), the United States Supreme...
McCullen v. Coakley: Redefining Buffer Zones and First Amendment Protections

McCullen v. Coakley: Redefining Buffer Zones and First Amendment Protections

Date: Jun 27, 2014
McCullen v. Coakley: Redefining Buffer Zones and First Amendment Protections Introduction McCullen v. Coakley, 573 U.S. 464 (2014), is a landmark Supreme Court case that scrutinized the...
No Special Presumption of Prudence for ESOP Fiduciaries Under ERISA

No Special Presumption of Prudence for ESOP Fiduciaries Under ERISA

Date: Jun 26, 2014
No Special Presumption of Prudence for ESOP Fiduciaries Under ERISA Introduction In the landmark case Fifth Third Bancorp et al. v. John Dudenhoeffer et al., the United States Supreme Court addressed...
Aereo v. ABC: Redefining Public Performance Rights in the Digital Age

Aereo v. ABC: Redefining Public Performance Rights in the Digital Age

Date: Jun 26, 2014
Aereo v. ABC: Redefining Public Performance Rights in the Digital Age 1. Introduction The Supreme Court case American Broadcasting Companies, Inc. v. Aereo, Inc. (573 U.S. 431, 2014) marks a...
Supreme Court Establishes Warrant Requirement for Cell Phone Searches Incident to Arrest

Supreme Court Establishes Warrant Requirement for Cell Phone Searches Incident to Arrest

Date: Jun 26, 2014
Supreme Court Establishes Warrant Requirement for Cell Phone Searches Incident to Arrest Introduction In the landmark decision of Da v. d Leon Riley, 573 U.S. 373 (2014), the United States Supreme...
Riley v. California: Establishing the Warrant Requirement for Digital Data Searches Incident to Arrest

Riley v. California: Establishing the Warrant Requirement for Digital Data Searches Incident to Arrest

Date: Jun 26, 2014
Riley v. California: Establishing the Warrant Requirement for Digital Data Searches Incident to Arrest Introduction Riley v. California is a landmark Supreme Court case decided on June 25, 2014, that...
Utility Air Regulatory Group v. EPA: Supreme Court Limits EPA's Permitting Authority for Greenhouse Gas Emissions under the Clean Air Act

Utility Air Regulatory Group v. EPA: Supreme Court Limits EPA's Permitting Authority for Greenhouse Gas Emissions under the Clean Air Act

Date: Jun 24, 2014
Utility Air Regulatory Group v. EPA: Supreme Court Limits EPA's Permitting Authority for Greenhouse Gas Emissions under the Clean Air Act Introduction In the landmark case Utility Air Regulatory...
Utility Air Regulatory Group v. EPA: Limiting Agency Authority in Greenhouse Gas Regulation

Utility Air Regulatory Group v. EPA: Limiting Agency Authority in Greenhouse Gas Regulation

Date: Jun 24, 2014
Utility Air Regulatory Group v. Environmental Protection Agency: Limiting Agency Authority in Greenhouse Gas Regulation Introduction Utility Air Regulatory Group v. Environmental Protection Agency...
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