Log In
  • US
  • 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)
  • Supreme Court
  • High Courts
    All High Courts
    Allahabad High Court
    Andhra Pradesh High Court
    Bombay High Court
    Calcutta High Court
    Chhattisgarh High Court
    Delhi High Court
    Gauhati High Court
    Gujarat High Court
    Himachal Pradesh High Court
    Jammu and Kashmir High Court
    Jharkhand High Court
    Karnataka High Court
    Kerala High Court
    Madhya Pradesh High Court
    Madras High Court
    Manipur High Court
    Meghalaya High Court
    Orissa High Court
    Patna High Court
    Punjab & Haryana High Court
    Rajasthan High Court
    Sikkim High Court
    Telangana High Court
    Tripura High Court
    Uttarakhand High Court
Log In Sign Up India Judgments
  • US
  • 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

Limiting Detention Incident to Search Warrants: Chunon L. Bailey v. United States

Limiting Detention Incident to Search Warrants: Chunon L. Bailey v. United States

Date: Feb 20, 2013
Limiting Detention Incident to Search Warrants: Chunon L. Bailey v. United States Introduction Chunon L. Bailey, aka Polo, Petitioner v. United States (568 U.S. 186) is a significant U.S. Supreme...
Clear Articulation Standard for State-Action Immunity in Antitrust Law: Insights from FTC v. Phoebe Putney Health System, Inc.

Clear Articulation Standard for State-Action Immunity in Antitrust Law: Insights from FTC v. Phoebe Putney Health System, Inc.

Date: Feb 20, 2013
Clear Articulation Standard for State-Action Immunity in Antitrust Law: Insights from FTC v. Phoebe Putney Health System, Inc. Introduction FTC v. Phoebe Putney Health System, Inc. is a landmark case...
Extension of Administrative Appeal Deadlines under Medicare: Sebelius v. Auburn Regional Medical Center

Extension of Administrative Appeal Deadlines under Medicare: Sebelius v. Auburn Regional Medical Center

Date: Jan 23, 2013
Extension of Administrative Appeal Deadlines under Medicare: Sebelius v. Auburn Regional Medical Center Introduction Kathleen Sebelius, Secretary of Health and Human Services v. Auburn Regional...
Non-Jurisdictional Time Limits in Medicare Appeals: Insights from Sebelius v. CESE

Non-Jurisdictional Time Limits in Medicare Appeals: Insights from Sebelius v. CESE

Date: Jan 23, 2013
Non-Jurisdictional Time Limits in Medicare Appeals: Insights from Sebelius v. CESE Introduction In the landmark case of Kathleen Sebelius, Secretary of Health and Human Services v. CESE, the United...
Supreme Court Clarifies "Vessel" Definition: Lozman v. City of Riviera Beach

Supreme Court Clarifies "Vessel" Definition: Lozman v. City of Riviera Beach

Date: Jan 16, 2013
Supreme Court Clarifies "Vessel" Definition: Lozman v. City of Riviera Beach Introduction In Fane Lozman v. City of Riviera Beach, Florida, 568 U.S. 115 (2013), the United States Supreme Court...
Clarifying Vessel Status: Supreme Court Establishes Practical Use Standard in Lozman v. City of Riviera Beach

Clarifying Vessel Status: Supreme Court Establishes Practical Use Standard in Lozman v. City of Riviera Beach

Date: Jan 16, 2013
Clarifying Vessel Status: Supreme Court Establishes Practical Use Standard in Lozman v. City of Riviera Beach Introduction The landmark case of Fane Lozman v. The City of Riviera Beach, Florida,...
Burden of Proof in Withdrawal Defense for Conspiracy Charges: Cal v. Smith

Burden of Proof in Withdrawal Defense for Conspiracy Charges: Cal v. Smith

Date: Jan 10, 2013
Burden of Proof in Withdrawal Defense for Conspiracy Charges: Cal v. Smith 1. Introduction In Calvin Smith v. United States, the Supreme Court addressed a pivotal issue concerning the burden of proof...
Defendant's Burden in Withdrawal Defense Upholding Due Process: Cal v. Smith

Defendant's Burden in Withdrawal Defense Upholding Due Process: Cal v. Smith

Date: Jan 10, 2013
Defendant's Burden in Withdrawal Defense Upholding Due Process: Cal v. Smith Introduction Cal v. Smith is a landmark decision by the United States Supreme Court that addresses the allocation of the...
Voluntary Cessation and Mootness in Trademark Enforcement: Already, LLC v. Nike, Inc.

Voluntary Cessation and Mootness in Trademark Enforcement: Already, LLC v. Nike, Inc.

Date: Jan 10, 2013
Voluntary Cessation and Mootness in Trademark Enforcement: Already, LLC v. Nike, Inc. Introduction Already, LLC, dba Yums v. Nike, Inc. is a landmark decision by the United States Supreme Court...
Covenant Not to Sue and Mootness in Trademark Litigation: Analysis of Already, LLC v. Nike, Inc.

Covenant Not to Sue and Mootness in Trademark Litigation: Analysis of Already, LLC v. Nike, Inc.

Date: Jan 10, 2013
Covenant Not to Sue and Mootness in Trademark Litigation: Analysis of Already, LLC v. Nike, Inc. Introduction In the landmark case Already, LLC, dba Yums v. Nike, Inc., 133 S.Ct. 721 (2013), the...
Flow Within Waterways Not a "Discharge" Under CWA: SCOTUS Rules in Los Angeles County Flood Control District v. NRDC

Flow Within Waterways Not a "Discharge" Under CWA: SCOTUS Rules in Los Angeles County Flood Control District v. NRDC

Date: Jan 9, 2013
Flow Within Waterways Not a "Discharge" Under CWA: SCOTUS Rules in Los Angeles County Flood Control District v. NRDC Introduction The case of Los Angeles County Flood Control District v. Natural...
Supreme Court Reaffirms No Statutory Right to Competence under 18 U.S.C. §§3599 and 4241 in Federal Habeas Proceedings

Supreme Court Reaffirms No Statutory Right to Competence under 18 U.S.C. §§3599 and 4241 in Federal Habeas Proceedings

Date: Jan 9, 2013
Supreme Court Reaffirms No Statutory Right to Competence under 18 U.S.C. §§3599 and 4241 in Federal Habeas Proceedings Introduction The landmark Supreme Court decision in Ryan v. Gonzales & Terry...
Flow from Concrete-Lined Channels Does Not Constitute a “Discharge of a Pollutant” Under the Clean Water Act

Flow from Concrete-Lined Channels Does Not Constitute a “Discharge of a Pollutant” Under the Clean Water Act

Date: Jan 9, 2013
Flow from Concrete-Lined Channels Does Not Constitute a “Discharge of a Pollutant” Under the Clean Water Act Introduction Los Angeles County Flood Control District v. Natural Resources Defense...
Supreme Court Clarifies Limits on Competency-Related Stays in Federal Habeas Proceedings

Supreme Court Clarifies Limits on Competency-Related Stays in Federal Habeas Proceedings

Date: Jan 9, 2013
Supreme Court Clarifies Limits on Competency-Related Stays in Federal Habeas Proceedings Introduction In the landmark cases of Charles L. Ryan v. Ernest Valencia Gonzales Terry Tibbals and Sean...
Supreme Court Clarifies Lack of Statutory Right to Competence in Federal Habeas Proceedings for Death Row Inmates

Supreme Court Clarifies Lack of Statutory Right to Competence in Federal Habeas Proceedings for Death Row Inmates

Date: Jan 9, 2013
Supreme Court Clarifies Lack of Statutory Right to Competence in Federal Habeas Proceedings for Death Row Inmates Introduction The Supreme Court case Ryan v. Gonzales & Tibbals v. Carter, decided on...
District Court as Correct Venue for Judicial Review of Mixed Cases: KLOECKNER v. SOLIS

District Court as Correct Venue for Judicial Review of Mixed Cases: KLOECKNER v. SOLIS

Date: Dec 11, 2012
District Court as Correct Venue for Judicial Review of Mixed Cases: KLOECKNER v. SOLIS Introduction The Supreme Court case Carolyn M. Kloeckner v. Hilda L. Solis, decided on December 10, 2012,...
District Court as the Proper Venue for Mixed Employment Discrimination Cases Following MSPB Procedural Dismissal

District Court as the Proper Venue for Mixed Employment Discrimination Cases Following MSPB Procedural Dismissal

Date: Dec 11, 2012
District Court as the Proper Venue for Mixed Employment Discrimination Cases Following MSPB Procedural Dismissal Introduction Carolyn M. Kloeckner v. Hilda L. Solis is a landmark 2012 U.S. Supreme...
Temporary Government-Induced Flooding and the Takings Clause: Supreme Court Insights from Arkansas Game and Fish Commission v. United States

Temporary Government-Induced Flooding and the Takings Clause: Supreme Court Insights from Arkansas Game and Fish Commission v. United States

Date: Dec 5, 2012
Temporary Government-Induced Flooding and the Takings Clause: Supreme Court Insights from Arkansas Game and Fish Commission v. United States Introduction An overview of the case, its background, key...
Recurrent Temporary Government-Induced Flooding as a Compensable Taking

Recurrent Temporary Government-Induced Flooding as a Compensable Taking

Date: Dec 5, 2012
Recurrent Temporary Government-Induced Flooding as a Compensable Taking Introduction In Arkansas Game and Fish Commission v. United States, 568 U.S. 23 (2013), the United States Supreme Court...
Enhancing Effective Counsel in Capital Sentencing: Insights from Hodge v. Kentucky

Enhancing Effective Counsel in Capital Sentencing: Insights from Hodge v. Kentucky

Date: Dec 4, 2012
Enhancing Effective Counsel in Capital Sentencing: Insights from Hodge v. Kentucky Introduction Benny Lee Hodge v. Kentucky (133 S. Ct. 506, 2012) serves as a pivotal case in the realm of capital...
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
  • Judgment Takedown Policy (India)
  • CaseMine API
  • CaseMine's Bespoke AI Solutions
  • Judge Signup
  • Student Signup

CaseMine Tools

  • CaseIQ
  • Judgment Search
  • Parallel Search
  • AttorneyIQ
  • Browse Cases
  • Acts

© 2023 Gauge Data Solutions Pvt. Ltd.

Summary

Alert