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

Resendiz-Ponce v. United States: Clarifying Indictment Requirements for Attempted Reentry

Resendiz-Ponce v. United States: Clarifying Indictment Requirements for Attempted Reentry

Date: Jan 10, 2007
Resendiz-Ponce v. United States: Clarifying Indictment Requirements for Attempted Reentry Introduction Resendiz-Ponce v. United States, 549 U.S. 102 (2007), addresses the sufficiency of indictments...
Authorization Requirements for Successive Habeas Corpus Petitions: Insights from Burton v. Stewart

Authorization Requirements for Successive Habeas Corpus Petitions: Insights from Burton v. Stewart

Date: Jan 10, 2007
Authorization Requirements for Successive Habeas Corpus Petitions: Insights from Burton v. Stewart Introduction Burton v. Stewart, Superintendent, Stafford Creek Corrections Center, 549 U.S. 147...
Defining the Bounds of Indictment Specificity in Criminal Attempts: Insights from United States v. Resendiz-Ponce

Defining the Bounds of Indictment Specificity in Criminal Attempts: Insights from United States v. Resendiz-Ponce

Date: Jan 10, 2007
Defining the Bounds of Indictment Specificity in Criminal Attempts: Insights from United States v. Resendiz-Ponce Introduction United States v. Resendiz-Ponce (549 U.S. 102) is a pivotal Supreme...
MedImmune v. Genentech: Licensees Can Seek Declaratory Judgments on Patent Validity Without Breaching License Agreements

MedImmune v. Genentech: Licensees Can Seek Declaratory Judgments on Patent Validity Without Breaching License Agreements

Date: Jan 10, 2007
MedImmune v. Genentech: Licensees Can Seek Declaratory Judgments on Patent Validity Without Breaching License Agreements Introduction In MEDIMMUNE, INC. v. GENENTECH, INC., 549 U.S. 118 (2007), the...
BP America Production Co. v. Burton: Clarifying the Scope of 28 U.S.C. §2415(a) in Administrative Royalty Actions

BP America Production Co. v. Burton: Clarifying the Scope of 28 U.S.C. §2415(a) in Administrative Royalty Actions

Date: Dec 12, 2006
BP America Production Co. v. Burton: Clarifying the Scope of 28 U.S.C. §2415(a) in Administrative Royalty Actions A Comprehensive Commentary on the Supreme Court’s 2006 Decision Introduction BP...
Private Spectator Conduct in Courtrooms and Its Impact on Fair Trial Rights: *Carey v. Musladin*

Private Spectator Conduct in Courtrooms and Its Impact on Fair Trial Rights: *Carey v. Musladin*

Date: Dec 12, 2006
Private Spectator Conduct in Courtrooms and Its Impact on Fair Trial Rights: Carey v. Musladin Introduction Carey v. Musladin, 549 U.S. 70 (2006), is a landmark case adjudicated by the United States...
Musladin v. Carey: Clarifying the Boundaries of Spectator Conduct in the Courtroom

Musladin v. Carey: Clarifying the Boundaries of Spectator Conduct in the Courtroom

Date: Dec 12, 2006
Musladin v. Carey: Clarifying the Boundaries of Spectator Conduct in the Courtroom Introduction Musladin v. Carey, 549 U.S. 70 (2006), is a significant U.S. Supreme Court case that addresses the...
Clarifying "Aggravated Felony" Under the INA: LOPEZ v. GONZALES

Clarifying "Aggravated Felony" Under the INA: LOPEZ v. GONZALES

Date: Dec 6, 2006
Clarifying "Aggravated Felony" Under the INA: LOPEZ v. GONZALES Introduction LOPEZ v. GONZALES, 549 U.S. 47 (2006), is a pivotal United States Supreme Court decision that delves into the intricate...
Defining Aggravated Felony: State Felonies Must Align with the Controlled Substances Act under the INA

Defining Aggravated Felony: State Felonies Must Align with the Controlled Substances Act under the INA

Date: Dec 6, 2006
Defining Aggravated Felony: State Felonies Must Align with the Controlled Substances Act under the INA Introduction Jose Antonio Lopez, a legal permanent resident of the United States, was at the...
Supreme Court Confirms 'Factor K' Instruction Compliance with the Eighth Amendment in Ayers v. Belmontes

Supreme Court Confirms 'Factor K' Instruction Compliance with the Eighth Amendment in Ayers v. Belmontes

Date: Nov 14, 2006
Supreme Court Confirms 'Factor K' Instruction Compliance with the Eighth Amendment in Ayers v. Belmontes Introduction In Ayers, Acting Warden v. Belmontes, 549 U.S. 7 (2006), the United States...
Deference to District Court Discretion in Injunctions: SCOTUS Vacates Ninth Circuit’s Order on Arizona Voter ID Law

Deference to District Court Discretion in Injunctions: SCOTUS Vacates Ninth Circuit’s Order on Arizona Voter ID Law

Date: Oct 21, 2006
Deference to District Court Discretion in Injunctions: SCOTUS Vacates Ninth Circuit’s Order on Arizona Voter ID Law Introduction The case of Helen Purcell, Maricopa County Recorder, et al. v. Maria...
Vacating the Ninth Circuit's Order on Voter Identification Requirements

Vacating the Ninth Circuit's Order on Voter Identification Requirements

Date: Oct 21, 2006
Vacating the Ninth Circuit's Order on Voter Identification Requirements Introduction Purcell et al. v. Gonzalez et al., 549 U.S. 1 (2006), is a significant Supreme Court decision that addresses the...
HAMDAN v. RUMSFELD (2006): Supreme Court Sets Limits on Military Commissions Under UCMJ and Geneva Conventions

HAMDAN v. RUMSFELD (2006): Supreme Court Sets Limits on Military Commissions Under UCMJ and Geneva Conventions

Date: Jun 30, 2006
HAMDAN v. RUMSFELD (2006): Supreme Court Sets Limits on Military Commissions Under UCMJ and Geneva Conventions Introduction In the aftermath of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, the United...
Clark v. Arizona: Upholding Arizona’s Insanity Defense Standards and Restricting Mental Illness Evidence

Clark v. Arizona: Upholding Arizona’s Insanity Defense Standards and Restricting Mental Illness Evidence

Date: Jun 30, 2006
Clark v. Arizona: Upholding Arizona’s Insanity Defense Standards and Restricting Mental Illness Evidence Introduction In the landmark case of Clark v. Arizona, 548 U.S. 735 (2006), the United States...
Vienna Convention Consular Notification: Supreme Court's Precedent in Sanchez-Llamas v. Oregon

Vienna Convention Consular Notification: Supreme Court's Precedent in Sanchez-Llamas v. Oregon

Date: Jun 29, 2006
Vienna Convention Consular Notification: Supreme Court's Precedent in Sanchez-Llamas v. Oregon Introduction Sanchez-Llamas v. Oregon, 548 U.S. 331 (2006), is a landmark decision by the United States...
BEARD v. BANKS: Upholding Constitutional Restrictions in Pennsylvania Prisons

BEARD v. BANKS: Upholding Constitutional Restrictions in Pennsylvania Prisons

Date: Jun 29, 2006
BEARD v. BANKS: Upholding Constitutional Restrictions in Pennsylvania Prisons Introduction Beard, Secretary, Pennsylvania Department of Corrections v. Banks, 548 U.S. 521 (2006), is a significant...
League of United Latin American Citizens v. Perry: Upholding §2 of the Voting Rights Act Against Vote Dilution

League of United Latin American Citizens v. Perry: Upholding §2 of the Voting Rights Act Against Vote Dilution

Date: Jun 29, 2006
League of United Latin American Citizens v. Perry: Upholding §2 of the Voting Rights Act Against Vote Dilution Introduction League of United Latin American Citizens et al. v. Perry, Governor of Texas...
Washington v. Recuenco: Clarifying Blakely Error and Sentencing Factor Submissions

Washington v. Recuenco: Clarifying Blakely Error and Sentencing Factor Submissions

Date: Jun 27, 2006
Washington v. Recuenco: Clarifying Blakely Error and Sentencing Factor Submissions Introduction Washington v. Recuenco, 548 U.S. 212 (2006), is a pivotal Supreme Court decision that addresses the...
Supreme Court Establishes Limitation on Recovery of Expert Fees under IDEA

Supreme Court Establishes Limitation on Recovery of Expert Fees under IDEA

Date: Jun 27, 2006
Supreme Court Establishes Limitation on Recovery of Expert Fees under IDEA Introduction The case of Arlington Central School District Board of Education v. Murphy et vir. (548 U.S. 291) addressed a...
Supreme Court Reaffirms Strict Scrutiny on State Campaign Finance Contribution and Expenditure Limits in Randall v. Sorrell

Supreme Court Reaffirms Strict Scrutiny on State Campaign Finance Contribution and Expenditure Limits in Randall v. Sorrell

Date: Jun 27, 2006
Supreme Court Reaffirms Strict Scrutiny on State Campaign Finance Contribution and Expenditure Limits in Randall v. Sorrell Introduction Randall et al. v. Sorrell et al. (548 U.S. 230, 2006) is a...
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