Log In
  • India
  • US
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)
  • Commentaries
    United Kingdom
    England and Wales
    Scotland
    Northern Ireland
    Ireland
Log In Sign Up UK Judgments
  • India
  • US

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

affirmation-of-indigent-defendants&amp Case Commentaries

Causal Nexus and Finality of Consent Awards: Third Department Limits “Removal for Cause” Decertification under 9 NYCRR 6056.2(h)

Causal Nexus and Finality of Consent Awards: Third Department Limits “Removal for Cause” Decertification under 9 NYCRR 6056.2(h)

Date: Nov 1, 2025
Causal Nexus and Finality of Consent Awards: Third Department Limits “Removal for Cause” Decertification under 9 NYCRR 6056.2(h) Introduction In Matter of Ferretti v. New York State Division of...
Implicit Severance Bars CPLR 5501(a)(1) Review of a Prior Final Judgment; Easement Holders Cannot Obstruct Rights-of-Way by Parking

Implicit Severance Bars CPLR 5501(a)(1) Review of a Prior Final Judgment; Easement Holders Cannot Obstruct Rights-of-Way by Parking

Date: Nov 1, 2025
Implicit Severance Bars CPLR 5501(a)(1) Review of a Prior Final Judgment; Easement Holders Cannot Obstruct Rights-of-Way by Parking Introduction This commentary examines the Appellate Division, Third...
Pleading Actual-Intent UVTA Claims in New York: Third Department Aligns § 273(a)(1) with CPLR 3016(b), Permits Information‑and‑Belief Allegations with Factual Basis, and Rejects Affidavits as “Documentary Evidence” on CPLR 3211 Motions

Pleading Actual-Intent UVTA Claims in New York: Third Department Aligns § 273(a)(1) with CPLR 3016(b), Permits Information‑and‑Belief Allegations with Factual Basis, and Rejects Affidavits as “Documentary Evidence” on CPLR 3211 Motions

Date: Nov 1, 2025
Pleading Actual-Intent UVTA Claims in New York: Third Department Aligns § 273(a)(1) with CPLR 3016(b), Permits Information‑and‑Belief Allegations with Factual Basis, and Rejects Affidavits as...
People v. Demas: Passing “Superseding Indictment” References, Limited Juror–Witness Familiarity, and Minor Inaccuracies Do Not, Without More, Impair Grand Jury Integrity Under CPL 210.35(5)

People v. Demas: Passing “Superseding Indictment” References, Limited Juror–Witness Familiarity, and Minor Inaccuracies Do Not, Without More, Impair Grand Jury Integrity Under CPL 210.35(5)

Date: Nov 1, 2025
People v. Demas: Passing “Superseding Indictment” References, Limited Juror–Witness Familiarity, and Minor Inaccuracies Do Not, Without More, Impair Grand Jury Integrity Under CPL 210.35(5) Decision:...
People v. George: Deliberate Vehicular Assault Supports Inferences of Intent for Aggravated Animal Cruelty and Criminal Mischief; Strategic Rejection of an EED Defense Constitutes Effective Assistance

People v. George: Deliberate Vehicular Assault Supports Inferences of Intent for Aggravated Animal Cruelty and Criminal Mischief; Strategic Rejection of an EED Defense Constitutes Effective Assistance

Date: Nov 1, 2025
People v. George: Deliberate Vehicular Assault Supports Inferences of Intent for Aggravated Animal Cruelty and Criminal Mischief; Strategic Rejection of an EED Defense Constitutes Effective...
No Automatic Conflict from Out‑of‑County Brief‑Writing Relationship Between Defense Counsel and Prosecutor; Defendant Must Show the Potential Conflict Operated on the Defense

No Automatic Conflict from Out‑of‑County Brief‑Writing Relationship Between Defense Counsel and Prosecutor; Defendant Must Show the Potential Conflict Operated on the Defense

Date: Nov 1, 2025
No Automatic Conflict from Out‑of‑County Brief‑Writing Relationship Between Defense Counsel and Prosecutor; Defendant Must Show the Potential Conflict Operated on the Defense Commentary on People v....
People v. Riddick: DNA-Focused “Trace Evidence” Warrants, Public-Street Phone Seizures, and Expanded Use of Molineux and Opening-the-Door When Identity Is the Only Issue

People v. Riddick: DNA-Focused “Trace Evidence” Warrants, Public-Street Phone Seizures, and Expanded Use of Molineux and Opening-the-Door When Identity Is the Only Issue

Date: Nov 1, 2025
People v. Riddick: DNA-Focused “Trace Evidence” Warrants, Public-Street Phone Seizures, and Expanded Use of Molineux and Opening-the-Door When Identity Is the Only Issue Court: Appellate Division of...
Environmental Noncompliance as Material Breach: Subcontractor Barred from Payment and Bond Recovery; Surety’s Takeover with Reservation of Rights Upheld; No Judicial Estoppel Without Prior Success

Environmental Noncompliance as Material Breach: Subcontractor Barred from Payment and Bond Recovery; Surety’s Takeover with Reservation of Rights Upheld; No Judicial Estoppel Without Prior Success

Date: Nov 1, 2025
Environmental Noncompliance as Material Breach: Subcontractor Barred from Payment and Bond Recovery; Surety’s Takeover with Reservation of Rights Upheld; No Judicial Estoppel Without Prior Success...
File-Stamp Omissions on Criminal Informations Are Non‑Jurisdictional and Do Not Support Habeas Relief

File-Stamp Omissions on Criminal Informations Are Non‑Jurisdictional and Do Not Support Habeas Relief

Date: Nov 1, 2025
File-Stamp Omissions on Criminal Informations Are Non‑Jurisdictional and Do Not Support Habeas Relief Case: Edward Lee Carter v. Dexter Payne, Director, Arkansas Division of Correction, 2025 Ark. 168...
Article 5, § 1 Controls: Arkansas Supreme Court Invalidates County Initiative Filing Statutes and Bars “Carryover” Certification of Untimely Petitions

Article 5, § 1 Controls: Arkansas Supreme Court Invalidates County Initiative Filing Statutes and Bars “Carryover” Certification of Untimely Petitions

Date: Nov 1, 2025
Article 5, § 1 Controls: Arkansas Supreme Court Invalidates County Initiative Filing Statutes and Bars “Carryover” Certification of Untimely Petitions Introduction This commentary examines the...
Utah Supreme Court Limits Past Medical Specials to Amounts Actually Incurred; Negotiated Rate Differential Is Not a Collateral Source

Utah Supreme Court Limits Past Medical Specials to Amounts Actually Incurred; Negotiated Rate Differential Is Not a Collateral Source

Date: Nov 1, 2025
Utah Supreme Court Limits Past Medical Specials to Amounts Actually Incurred; Negotiated Rate Differential Is Not a Collateral Source Introduction In Gardner v. Norman, 2025 UT 47, the Utah Supreme...
Leavitt v. OPC: Utah Supreme Court Equates “Reasonably Should Know” with Negligence Under Rule 3.6 and Affirms Public Reprimand for Prejudicial Prosecutorial Press Conference

Leavitt v. OPC: Utah Supreme Court Equates “Reasonably Should Know” with Negligence Under Rule 3.6 and Affirms Public Reprimand for Prejudicial Prosecutorial Press Conference

Date: Nov 1, 2025
Leavitt v. OPC: Utah Supreme Court Equates “Reasonably Should Know” with Negligence Under Rule 3.6 and Affirms Public Reprimand for Prejudicial Prosecutorial Press Conference Introduction This...
No Direct Appeal as of Right from Denial of Motion to Modify Pretrial Detention: Utah Supreme Court Narrows § 77-20-209 (State v. Harris, 2025 UT 48)

No Direct Appeal as of Right from Denial of Motion to Modify Pretrial Detention: Utah Supreme Court Narrows § 77-20-209 (State v. Harris, 2025 UT 48)

Date: Nov 1, 2025
No Direct Appeal as of Right from Denial of Motion to Modify Pretrial Detention: Utah Supreme Court Narrows § 77-20-209 Introduction In State v. Harris, 2025 UT 48, the Utah Supreme Court resolved a...
Stipulated Relocation Timelines Do Not Terminate UCCJEA Exclusive, Continuing Jurisdiction Absent RSA 458-A:13 Findings

Stipulated Relocation Timelines Do Not Terminate UCCJEA Exclusive, Continuing Jurisdiction Absent RSA 458-A:13 Findings

Date: Nov 1, 2025
Stipulated Relocation Timelines Do Not Terminate UCCJEA Exclusive, Continuing Jurisdiction Absent RSA 458-A:13 Findings Introduction In the Matter of Taylor Coyne and Ashley Blanchfield (N.H. Sup....
Erickson v. Pharmacia: WPLA Does Not Displace Washington’s Issue-by-Issue Choice-of-Law; Missouri Law Can Control Repose and Punitive Damages, and PCB Exposure Reconstruction Satisfies Frye

Erickson v. Pharmacia: WPLA Does Not Displace Washington’s Issue-by-Issue Choice-of-Law; Missouri Law Can Control Repose and Punitive Damages, and PCB Exposure Reconstruction Satisfies Frye

Date: Nov 1, 2025
Erickson v. Pharmacia: WPLA Does Not Displace Washington’s Issue-by-Issue Choice-of-Law; Missouri Law Can Control Repose and Punitive Damages, and PCB Exposure Reconstruction Satisfies Frye...
State v. Luna: Meaningful Youth Inquiry for Miranda Waivers, Prospective-Only Juvenile Consultation Statute, and a Narrowed Res Gestae Doctrine

State v. Luna: Meaningful Youth Inquiry for Miranda Waivers, Prospective-Only Juvenile Consultation Statute, and a Narrowed Res Gestae Doctrine

Date: Nov 1, 2025
State v. Luna: Meaningful Youth Inquiry for Miranda Waivers, Prospective-Only Juvenile Consultation Statute, and a Narrowed Res Gestae Doctrine Introduction In State v. Luna, No. 103251-0 (Wash. Oct....
Minimal FTCA Presentment and Marshals’ Duty to Assist IFP Service: The Third Circuit’s Freeman v. Lincalis Precedent

Minimal FTCA Presentment and Marshals’ Duty to Assist IFP Service: The Third Circuit’s Freeman v. Lincalis Precedent

Date: Nov 1, 2025
Minimal FTCA Presentment and Marshals’ Duty to Assist IFP Service: The Third Circuit’s Freeman v. Lincalis Precedent Introduction In a precedential opinion, the Third Circuit in Rocky L. Freeman v....
No Right to Vote on a Particular Schedule: The Fifth Circuit Upholds Mid‑Cycle Redistricting and Treats “Vote Postponement” as Non-Disenfranchisement

No Right to Vote on a Particular Schedule: The Fifth Circuit Upholds Mid‑Cycle Redistricting and Treats “Vote Postponement” as Non-Disenfranchisement

Date: Nov 1, 2025
No Right to Vote on a Particular Schedule: The Fifth Circuit Upholds Mid‑Cycle Redistricting and Treats “Vote Postponement” as Non-Disenfranchisement Introduction In Jackson v. Tarrant County, the...
No End-Run Around Louisiana’s LHEPA: Plaintiffs Must Plausibly Plead Gross Negligence or Willful Misconduct—and Relabeling as Contract Won’t Avoid the Shield (Ware v. Irving Place, 5th Cir. 2025)

No End-Run Around Louisiana’s LHEPA: Plaintiffs Must Plausibly Plead Gross Negligence or Willful Misconduct—and Relabeling as Contract Won’t Avoid the Shield (Ware v. Irving Place, 5th Cir. 2025)

Date: Nov 1, 2025
No End-Run Around Louisiana’s LHEPA: Plaintiffs Must Plausibly Plead Gross Negligence or Willful Misconduct—and Relabeling as Contract Won’t Avoid the Shield Ware v. Irving Place (5th Cir. Oct. 29,...
No “Multiplicative” Preliminary Injunction Standard: Fourth Circuit Denies Shutdown-Based Extension to Fast-Track Clarification in AFT v. Bessent

No “Multiplicative” Preliminary Injunction Standard: Fourth Circuit Denies Shutdown-Based Extension to Fast-Track Clarification in AFT v. Bessent

Date: Nov 1, 2025
No “Multiplicative” Preliminary Injunction Standard: Fourth Circuit Denies Shutdown-Based Extension to Fast-Track Clarification in AFT v. Bessent Introduction In American Federation of Teachers v....
Previous   Next
CaseMine Logo

Know us better!

  • Request a Demo

Company

  • About Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie 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

© 2023 Gauge Data Solutions Pvt. Ltd.

Summary

Alert

We use cookies to improve your experience

You can accept all cookies or turn off analytical ones.