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

Enforcement Limitations of the 340B Program: Suits by Covered Entities Incompatible with Statutory Regime

Enforcement Limitations of the 340B Program: Suits by Covered Entities Incompatible with Statutory Regime

Date: Mar 30, 2011
Enforcement Limitations of the 340B Program: Suits by Covered Entities Incompatible with Statutory Regime Introduction The landmark case of Astra USA, Inc., et al. v. Santa Clara County, California...
Connick v. Thompson: Establishing the Limits of Municipal Liability for Single Brady Violations

Connick v. Thompson: Establishing the Limits of Municipal Liability for Single Brady Violations

Date: Mar 30, 2011
Connick v. Thompson: Establishing the Limits of Municipal Liability for Single Brady Violations Introduction Connick v. Thompson, 563 U.S. 51 (2011), is a landmark Supreme Court decision that...
Enforcement Limits on Third-Party Beneficiaries in 340B Drug Pricing Agreements

Enforcement Limits on Third-Party Beneficiaries in 340B Drug Pricing Agreements

Date: Mar 30, 2011
Enforcement Limits on Third-Party Beneficiaries in 340B Drug Pricing Agreements Introduction The Supreme Court case Astra USA, Inc., et al. v. Santa Clara County, California (563 U.S. 110) addresses...
RICO Causation Standards for Third-Party Payors in Pharmaceutical Fraud: Analysis of Sergeants Benevolent Association v. Eli Lilly

RICO Causation Standards for Third-Party Payors in Pharmaceutical Fraud: Analysis of Sergeants Benevolent Association v. Eli Lilly

Date: Mar 26, 2011
RICO Causation Standards for Third-Party Payors in Pharmaceutical Fraud: Analysis of Sergeants Benevolent Association Health and Welfare Fund v. Eli Lilly & Co. Introduction The Supreme Court case...
FLSA Antiretaliation Protection Expanded to Include Oral Complaints: Kasten v. Saint-Gobain

FLSA Antiretaliation Protection Expanded to Include Oral Complaints: Kasten v. Saint-Gobain

Date: Mar 23, 2011
FLSA Antiretaliation Protection Expanded to Include Oral Complaints: Kasten v. Saint-Gobain Introduction In KASTEN v. SAINT-GOBAIN PERFORMANCE PLASTICS Corporation, 563 U.S. 1 (2011), the United...
Matrixx Initiatives v. Siracusano: Reevaluating Materiality Beyond Statistical Significance in Securities Fraud Claims

Matrixx Initiatives v. Siracusano: Reevaluating Materiality Beyond Statistical Significance in Securities Fraud Claims

Date: Mar 23, 2011
Matrixx Initiatives v. Siracusano: Reevaluating Materiality Beyond Statistical Significance in Securities Fraud Claims Introduction Matrixx Initiatives, Inc. v. Siracusano is a pivotal Supreme Court...
Supreme Court Establishes §1983 Jurisdiction for Postconviction DNA Testing Claims in SKINNER v. SWITZER

Supreme Court Establishes §1983 Jurisdiction for Postconviction DNA Testing Claims in SKINNER v. SWITZER

Date: Mar 8, 2011
Supreme Court Establishes §1983 Jurisdiction for Postconviction DNA Testing Claims in SKINNER v. SWITZER Introduction SKINNER v. SWITZER (562 U.S. 521, 2011) represents a significant development in...
Defining FOIA Exemption 2: The Milner v. Department of the Navy Decision

Defining FOIA Exemption 2: The Milner v. Department of the Navy Decision

Date: Mar 8, 2011
Defining FOIA Exemption 2: The Milner v. Department of the Navy Decision Introduction Milner v. Department of the Navy, 562 U.S. 562 (2011), represents a pivotal Supreme Court decision that clarified...
Collateral Review Under AEDPA: U.S. Supreme Court Decision in Wall II v. Kholi

Collateral Review Under AEDPA: U.S. Supreme Court Decision in Wall II v. Kholi

Date: Mar 8, 2011
Collateral Review Under AEDPA: U.S. Supreme Court Decision in Wall II v. Kholi Introduction In Ashbel T. Wall II, Director, Rhode Island Department of Corrections, Petitioner v. Khalil Kholi, 562...
Expansion of §1983 Jurisdiction to Include Postconviction DNA Testing Claims

Expansion of §1983 Jurisdiction to Include Postconviction DNA Testing Claims

Date: Mar 8, 2011
Expansion of §1983 Jurisdiction to Include Postconviction DNA Testing Claims Introduction The landmark Supreme Court case SKINNER v. SWITZER addressed a pivotal issue in criminal justice: whether a...
Resentencing and Postsentencing Rehabilitation: New Precedent in Pepper v. United States

Resentencing and Postsentencing Rehabilitation: New Precedent in Pepper v. United States

Date: Mar 3, 2011
Resentencing and Postsentencing Rehabilitation: New Precedent in Pepper v. United States Introduction Jason Pepper v. United States, 562 U.S. 476 (2011), marks a significant development in federal...
First Amendment Protection of Picketing: SNYDER v. PHELPS and Its Legal Implications

First Amendment Protection of Picketing: SNYDER v. PHELPS and Its Legal Implications

Date: Mar 3, 2011
First Amendment Protection of Picketing: SNYDER v. PHELPS and Its Legal Implications Introduction Albert Snyder v. Fred W. Phelps, Sr., et al. is a landmark United States Supreme Court decision...
HENDERSON v. SHINSEKI: Filing Deadlines in Veterans Court Appeals Are Non-Jurisdictional

HENDERSON v. SHINSEKI: Filing Deadlines in Veterans Court Appeals Are Non-Jurisdictional

Date: Mar 2, 2011
HENDERSON v. SHINSEKI: Filing Deadlines in Veterans Court Appeals Are Non-Jurisdictional Introduction In HENDERSON v. SHINSEKI, 562 U.S. 428 (2011), the United States Supreme Court addressed a...
FOIA Exemption 7(C) Limited to Individuals: Supreme Court Clarifies Corporate Privacy Rights

FOIA Exemption 7(C) Limited to Individuals: Supreme Court Clarifies Corporate Privacy Rights

Date: Mar 2, 2011
FOIA Exemption 7(C) Limited to Individuals: Supreme Court Clarifies Corporate Privacy Rights Introduction The landmark case of Federal Communications Commission et al. v. AT&T Inc. et al. (562 U.S....
Proctor Hospital v. Staub: Establishing 'Cat's Paw' Liability Under USERRA

Proctor Hospital v. Staub: Establishing 'Cat's Paw' Liability Under USERRA

Date: Mar 2, 2011
Proctor Hospital v. Staub: Establishing 'Cat's Paw' Liability Under USERRA Introduction Proctor Hospital v. Vincent E. Staub is a landmark Supreme Court decision that reshaped the application of the...
Refining the 'Ongoing Emergency' Standard: Comprehensive Analysis of Michigan v. Bryant, 562 U.S. 344 (2011)

Refining the 'Ongoing Emergency' Standard: Comprehensive Analysis of Michigan v. Bryant, 562 U.S. 344 (2011)

Date: Mar 1, 2011
Refining the 'Ongoing Emergency' Standard: Comprehensive Analysis of Michigan v. Bryant, 562 U.S. 344 (2011) Introduction In Michigan v. Bryant, 562 U.S. 344 (2011), the United States Supreme Court...
Supreme Court Upholds California's 'Reasonableness' Standard as Adequate Procedural Bar in Habeas Corpus Petitions

Supreme Court Upholds California's 'Reasonableness' Standard as Adequate Procedural Bar in Habeas Corpus Petitions

Date: Feb 24, 2011
Supreme Court Upholds California's 'Reasonableness' Standard as Adequate Procedural Bar in Habeas Corpus Petitions 1. Introduction The case of James Walker, Warden, et al. v. Charles W. Martin (562...
Preemption of State Tort Suits under FMVSS 208: Insights from WILLIAMSON v. MAZDA MOTOR OF AMErica

Preemption of State Tort Suits under FMVSS 208: Insights from WILLIAMSON v. MAZDA MOTOR OF AMErica

Date: Feb 24, 2011
Preemption of State Tort Suits under FMVSS 208: Insights from WILLIAMSON v. MAZDA MOTOR OF AMErica Introduction The case of Delbert Williamson, et al. v. Mazda Motor of America, Inc., et al. (562...
Expansion of §11501(b)(4): Allowing Railroads to Challenge Differential Taxation

Expansion of §11501(b)(4): Allowing Railroads to Challenge Differential Taxation

Date: Feb 23, 2011
Expansion of §11501(b)(4): Allowing Railroads to Challenge Differential Taxation Introduction In CSX Transportation, Inc. v. Alabama Department of Revenue ET AL. (562 U.S. 277, 2011), the United...
Preemption of Design-Defect Claims in Vaccine Injury Cases: An Analysis of Bruesewitz v. Wyeth LLC

Preemption of Design-Defect Claims in Vaccine Injury Cases: An Analysis of Bruesewitz v. Wyeth LLC

Date: Feb 23, 2011
Preemption of Design-Defect Claims in Vaccine Injury Cases: An Analysis of Bruesewitz v. Wyeth LLC Introduction The case of Russell Bruesewitz, et al. v. Wyeth LLC, decided by the U.S. Supreme Court...
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