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

Enhancing Deference to Trial Courts in Death Penalty Juror Selection: Uttech v. Brown

Enhancing Deference to Trial Courts in Death Penalty Juror Selection: Uttech v. Brown

Date: Jun 5, 2007
Enhancing Deference to Trial Courts in Death Penalty Juror Selection: Uttech v. Brown Introduction In Jeffrey Uttech, Superintendent, Washington State Penitentiary, Petitioner v. Cal Coburn Brown,...
Supreme Court Clarifies 'Prevailing Party' for Attorney's Fees under §1988(b)

Supreme Court Clarifies 'Prevailing Party' for Attorney's Fees under §1988(b)

Date: Jun 5, 2007
Supreme Court Clarifies 'Prevailing Party' for Attorney's Fees under §1988(b) Introduction In the landmark case of Michael W. Sole, Secretary, Florida Department of Environmental Protection, et al....
Willful and Reckless Violations under the Fair Credit Reporting Act: Insights from SafeCo Insurance Co. v. Charles Burr

Willful and Reckless Violations under the Fair Credit Reporting Act: Insights from SafeCo Insurance Co. v. Charles Burr

Date: Jun 5, 2007
Willful and Reckless Violations under the Fair Credit Reporting Act: Insights from SafeCo Insurance Co. v. Charles Burr Introduction In the landmark case of SafeCo Insurance Co. of America et al. v....
Willful and Reckless Violations Under FCRA: Safeco Inc. v. Charles Burr et al. and GEICO Inc. v. Ajene Edo

Willful and Reckless Violations Under FCRA: Safeco Inc. v. Charles Burr et al. and GEICO Inc. v. Ajene Edo

Date: Jun 5, 2007
Willful and Reckless Violations Under FCRA: Safeco Inc. v. Charles Burr et al. and GEICO Inc. v. Ajene Edo Introduction The landmark Supreme Court case of Safeco Insurance Company of America, et al....
Erickson v. Pardus: Upholding Liberal Pleading Standards under FRCP 8(a)(2) for Eighth Amendment Claims

Erickson v. Pardus: Upholding Liberal Pleading Standards under FRCP 8(a)(2) for Eighth Amendment Claims

Date: Jun 5, 2007
Erickson v. Pardus: Upholding Liberal Pleading Standards under FRCP 8(a)(2) for Eighth Amendment Claims Introduction William Erickson v. Barry J. Pardus et al. (551 U.S. 89) is a significant case...
Preliminary Injunctions and Prevailing Party Status Under 42 U.S.C. § 1988(b): Analysis of Solé v. Wyner

Preliminary Injunctions and Prevailing Party Status Under 42 U.S.C. § 1988(b): Analysis of Solé v. Wyner

Date: Jun 5, 2007
Preliminary Injunctions and Prevailing Party Status Under 42 U.S.C. § 1988(b): Analysis of Solé v. Wyner Introduction In Solé v. Wyner, 551 U.S. 74 (2007), the United States Supreme Court addressed a...
Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire Rubber Co.: Defining Timeliness in Title VII Pay Discrimination Claims

Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire Rubber Co.: Defining Timeliness in Title VII Pay Discrimination Claims

Date: May 30, 2007
Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire Rubber Co.: Defining Timeliness in Title VII Pay Discrimination Claims Introduction Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire Rubber Co., 550 U.S. 618 (2007), is a landmark United States...
Statute of Limitations for Title VII Pay Discrimination Claims Affirmed in Ledbetter v. Goodyear

Statute of Limitations for Title VII Pay Discrimination Claims Affirmed in Ledbetter v. Goodyear

Date: May 30, 2007
Statute of Limitations for Title VII Pay Discrimination Claims Affirmed in Ledbetter v. Goodyear Introduction Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. (550 U.S. 618, 2007) is a pivotal United States...
Supreme Court Reaffirms Deputies' Authority to Secure Premises During Valid Warrant Execution Under the Fourth Amendment

Supreme Court Reaffirms Deputies' Authority to Secure Premises During Valid Warrant Execution Under the Fourth Amendment

Date: May 22, 2007
Supreme Court Reaffirms Deputies' Authority to Secure Premises During Valid Warrant Execution Under the Fourth Amendment Introduction LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, et al. v. Max RETTELE et al. (550...
IDEA Grants Independent Parental Rights: Comprehensive Analysis of WINKELMAN v. PARMA CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT

IDEA Grants Independent Parental Rights: Comprehensive Analysis of WINKELMAN v. PARMA CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT

Date: May 22, 2007
IDEA Grants Independent Parental Rights: Comprehensive Analysis of WINKELMAN v. PARMA CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT Introduction WINKELMAN v. PARMA CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT (550 U.S. 516, 2007) is a landmark...
Tax Court's Exclusive Jurisdiction Affirmed for Interest Abatement Claims under Internal Revenue Code §6404(e)(1)

Tax Court's Exclusive Jurisdiction Affirmed for Interest Abatement Claims under Internal Revenue Code §6404(e)(1)

Date: May 22, 2007
Tax Court's Exclusive Jurisdiction Affirmed for Interest Abatement Claims under Internal Revenue Code §6404(e)(1) Introduction HINCK ET UX. v. UNITED STATES, 550 U.S. 501 (2007), addressed a pivotal...
Rettele v. Los Angeles County: Upholding Fourth Amendment Protections in Search and Seizure Operations

Rettele v. Los Angeles County: Upholding Fourth Amendment Protections in Search and Seizure Operations

Date: May 22, 2007
Rettele v. Los Angeles County: Upholding Fourth Amendment Protections in Search and Seizure Operations Introduction Rettele v. Los Angeles County is a landmark case decided by the United States...
Affirmation of Parents' Independent Rights under IDEA: Supreme Court Allows Pro Se Representation

Affirmation of Parents' Independent Rights under IDEA: Supreme Court Allows Pro Se Representation

Date: May 22, 2007
Affirmation of Parents' Independent Rights under IDEA: Supreme Court Allows Pro Se Representation Introduction The case of Jacob Winkelman v. Parma City School District centered on the extent of...
Twombly v. Bell Atlantic: Redefining Antitrust Pleading Standards

Twombly v. Bell Atlantic: Redefining Antitrust Pleading Standards

Date: May 22, 2007
Twombly v. Bell Atlantic: Redefining Antitrust Pleading Standards Introduction Twombly v. Bell Atlantic, 550 U.S. 544 (2007), is a landmark decision by the United States Supreme Court that...
Exhaustion of State Remedies under AEDPA: An Analysis of Roper v. Weaver

Exhaustion of State Remedies under AEDPA: An Analysis of Roper v. Weaver

Date: May 22, 2007
Exhaustion of State Remedies under AEDPA: An Analysis of Roper v. Weaver Introduction Roper, Superintendent, Potosi Correctional Center v. Weaver is a notable case adjudicated by the United States...
Docket No. 05-1575: Schriro v. Landrigan - Affirmation of District Court's Discretion on Evidentiary Hearings under AEDPA

Docket No. 05-1575: Schriro v. Landrigan - Affirmation of District Court's Discretion on Evidentiary Hearings under AEDPA

Date: May 15, 2007
Schriro v. Landrigan: Upholding District Courts' Discretion in Granting Evidentiary Hearings under AEDPA Case: Dora B. Schriro, Director, Arizona Department of Corrections, Petitioner, v. Jeffrey...
Limits on Evidentiary Hearings for Ineffective Assistance Claims under AEDPA: Schriro v. Landrigan

Limits on Evidentiary Hearings for Ineffective Assistance Claims under AEDPA: Schriro v. Landrigan

Date: May 15, 2007
Limits on Evidentiary Hearings for Ineffective Assistance Claims under AEDPA: Schriro v. Landrigan Introduction Schriro, Director, Arizona Department of Corrections v. Landrigan, AKA Hill, 550 U.S....
Flow Control Ordinances Favoring Public Entities Upheld under Dormant Commerce Clause

Flow Control Ordinances Favoring Public Entities Upheld under Dormant Commerce Clause

Date: May 1, 2007
Flow Control Ordinances Favoring Public Entities Upheld under Dormant Commerce Clause Introduction In United Haulers Association, Inc. v. Oneida-Herkimer Solid Waste Management Authority, 550 U.S....
Microsoft Corp. v. ATT Corp.: Limiting §271(f) Liability for Software Components

Microsoft Corp. v. ATT Corp.: Limiting §271(f) Liability for Software Components

Date: May 1, 2007
Microsoft Corp. v. ATT Corp.: Limiting §271(f) Liability for Software Components Introduction Microsoft Corp. v. ATT Corp., 550 U.S. 437 (2007), is a pivotal Supreme Court decision that scrutinized...
Software Supply and Patent Infringement: Insights from Microsoft Corp. v. AT&T Corp.

Software Supply and Patent Infringement: Insights from Microsoft Corp. v. AT&T Corp.

Date: May 1, 2007
Software Supply and Patent Infringement: Insights from Microsoft Corp. v. AT&T Corp. Introduction In the landmark case of Microsoft Corp. v. AT&T Corp., decided by the United States Supreme Court on...
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