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

battery-claims-excluded-under-ftca&amp Case Commentaries

Good‑Faith Misinterpretation of Unsettled State Law Does Not Trigger § 1983 Liability: Fourth Circuit in Swart v. Miyares Channels Overdetention Claims to the Fourteenth Amendment

Good‑Faith Misinterpretation of Unsettled State Law Does Not Trigger § 1983 Liability: Fourth Circuit in Swart v. Miyares Channels Overdetention Claims to the Fourteenth Amendment

Date: Oct 17, 2025
Good‑Faith Misinterpretation of Unsettled State Law Does Not Trigger § 1983 Liability: Fourth Circuit in Swart v. Miyares Channels Overdetention Claims to the Fourteenth Amendment Introduction In...
Victim Identification Plus Corroborating Circumstances Suffice for Probable Cause; Unknown Omissions Do Not Vitiate Warrants — The Fourth Circuit’s Clarification in Moretti v. Thorsdottir

Victim Identification Plus Corroborating Circumstances Suffice for Probable Cause; Unknown Omissions Do Not Vitiate Warrants — The Fourth Circuit’s Clarification in Moretti v. Thorsdottir

Date: Oct 17, 2025
Victim Identification Plus Corroborating Circumstances Suffice for Probable Cause; Unknown Omissions Do Not Vitiate Warrants — The Fourth Circuit’s Clarification in Moretti v. Thorsdottir...
Forfeiture of Unraised Rule 11 Challenges and Harmless-Error Review for Plea Colloquy Omissions: United States v. Robert Smith, Jr. (4th Cir. 2025)

Forfeiture of Unraised Rule 11 Challenges and Harmless-Error Review for Plea Colloquy Omissions: United States v. Robert Smith, Jr. (4th Cir. 2025)

Date: Oct 17, 2025
Forfeiture of Unraised Rule 11 Challenges and Harmless-Error Review for Plea Colloquy Omissions: United States v. Robert Smith, Jr. (4th Cir. 2025) Introduction In United States v. Robert Smith, Jr.,...
When the BIA Misapplies Clear-Error Review, the Tenth Circuit May Reinstate an IJ’s Asylum Grant Without Remand

When the BIA Misapplies Clear-Error Review, the Tenth Circuit May Reinstate an IJ’s Asylum Grant Without Remand

Date: Oct 17, 2025
When the BIA Misapplies Clear-Error Review, the Tenth Circuit May Reinstate an IJ’s Asylum Grant Without Remand Introduction In Ramos v. Bondi, the Tenth Circuit issued a precedential opinion that...
Futility Trumps the Ordinary-Remand Rule: Tenth Circuit Polices BIA’s Clear-Error Review and Orders Reinstatement of Asylum

Futility Trumps the Ordinary-Remand Rule: Tenth Circuit Polices BIA’s Clear-Error Review and Orders Reinstatement of Asylum

Date: Oct 17, 2025
Futility Trumps the Ordinary-Remand Rule: Tenth Circuit Polices BIA’s Clear-Error Review and Orders Reinstatement of Asylum Introduction Ramos v. Bondi is a published decision of the U.S. Court of...
No Appeal, No Exhaustion: The Tenth Circuit Confirms Postage Receipts Don’t Prove PLRA Exhaustion in Wiggins v. Hatch

No Appeal, No Exhaustion: The Tenth Circuit Confirms Postage Receipts Don’t Prove PLRA Exhaustion in Wiggins v. Hatch

Date: Oct 17, 2025
No Appeal, No Exhaustion: The Tenth Circuit Confirms Postage Receipts Don’t Prove PLRA Exhaustion in Wiggins v. Hatch Introduction In Wiggins v. Hatch, Nos. 24-2159 & 24-2160 (10th Cir. Oct. 15,...
Wiggins v. Hatch: Proof of PLRA Exhaustion Requires Documented Grievance Appeals—Generic Postage Charges Are Insufficient

Wiggins v. Hatch: Proof of PLRA Exhaustion Requires Documented Grievance Appeals—Generic Postage Charges Are Insufficient

Date: Oct 17, 2025
Wiggins v. Hatch: Proof of PLRA Exhaustion Requires Documented Grievance Appeals—Generic Postage Charges Are Insufficient Introduction In Wiggins v. Hatch, the Tenth Circuit affirmed a district...
Ohio Supreme Court Caps Clerk Technology Fee at $1 Total Per Service for “Complete Record” Charges, Not Per Page

Ohio Supreme Court Caps Clerk Technology Fee at $1 Total Per Service for “Complete Record” Charges, Not Per Page

Date: Oct 17, 2025
Ohio Supreme Court Caps Clerk Technology Fee at $1 Total Per Service for “Complete Record” Charges, Not Per Page Case: State ex rel. Gault v. Medina County Court of Common Pleas Clerk, Slip Opinion...
Timeliness Is for the Arbitrator: Ohio Supreme Court Bars Employer Self‑Help on Arbitration Deadlines and Requires SERB to Explain ULP Dismissals

Timeliness Is for the Arbitrator: Ohio Supreme Court Bars Employer Self‑Help on Arbitration Deadlines and Requires SERB to Explain ULP Dismissals

Date: Oct 17, 2025
Timeliness Is for the Arbitrator: Ohio Supreme Court Bars Employer Self‑Help on Arbitration Deadlines and Requires SERB to Explain ULP Dismissals Introduction In State ex rel. Staple v. State...
Privilege Follows the Reporting: Montana High Court Holds Place of Newsgathering Governs Media-Subpoena Privileges

Privilege Follows the Reporting: Montana High Court Holds Place of Newsgathering Governs Media-Subpoena Privileges

Date: Oct 17, 2025
Privilege Follows the Reporting: Montana High Court Holds Place of Newsgathering Governs Media-Subpoena Privileges Introduction In EQT CHAP LLC v. Environmental Health Sciences, 2025 MT 237, the...
Interpreter Ambiguity, Written Translations, and Anders/Rule 26(c) Review Clarified: Muniz‑Rodriguez v. State

Interpreter Ambiguity, Written Translations, and Anders/Rule 26(c) Review Clarified: Muniz‑Rodriguez v. State

Date: Oct 17, 2025
Interpreter Ambiguity, Written Translations, and Anders/Rule 26(c) Review Clarified: Muniz‑Rodriguez v. State Introduction In Muniz‑Rodriguez v. State, No. 120, 2025 (Del. Oct. 14, 2025), the...
Disqualifying Faction Counsel from Representing the Entity in Control Disputes; Injunction Undertakings Must Be Tied to Non‑Speculative Damages

Disqualifying Faction Counsel from Representing the Entity in Control Disputes; Injunction Undertakings Must Be Tied to Non‑Speculative Damages

Date: Oct 17, 2025
Disqualifying Faction Counsel from Representing the Entity in Control Disputes; Injunction Undertakings Must Be Tied to Non‑Speculative Damages Introduction In Congregation Erech Shai Bais Yosef,...
Second Department Confirms Retroactive Reach of FAPA: Voluntary Discontinuance Cannot De‑Accelerate or Reset the Mortgage Foreclosure Limitations Period

Second Department Confirms Retroactive Reach of FAPA: Voluntary Discontinuance Cannot De‑Accelerate or Reset the Mortgage Foreclosure Limitations Period

Date: Oct 17, 2025
Second Department Confirms Retroactive Reach of FAPA: Voluntary Discontinuance Cannot De‑Accelerate or Reset the Mortgage Foreclosure Limitations Period Introduction In GITSIT Solutions, LLC v....
CVA Revival Upheld; Negligent Supervision and IIED Claims Against Institutions May Proceed While Vicarious Liability for Sexual Assault Is Dismissed: Georgiou v. St. Irene Monastery

CVA Revival Upheld; Negligent Supervision and IIED Claims Against Institutions May Proceed While Vicarious Liability for Sexual Assault Is Dismissed: Georgiou v. St. Irene Monastery

Date: Oct 17, 2025
CVA Revival Upheld; Negligent Supervision and IIED Claims Against Institutions May Proceed While Vicarious Liability for Sexual Assault Is Dismissed: Georgiou v. St. Irene Monastery Introduction In...
Forbearance of Divorce as Valid Consideration, Yet Oral Promises to Convey Realty Remain Unenforceable Against Subsequent Purchasers Absent Writing or “Unequivocally Referable” Part Performance — Makransky v. Makransky (2d Dep’t 2025)

Forbearance of Divorce as Valid Consideration, Yet Oral Promises to Convey Realty Remain Unenforceable Against Subsequent Purchasers Absent Writing or “Unequivocally Referable” Part Performance — Makransky v. Makransky (2d Dep’t 2025)

Date: Oct 17, 2025
Forbearance of Divorce as Valid Consideration, Yet Oral Promises to Convey Realty Remain Unenforceable Against Subsequent Purchasers Absent Writing or “Unequivocally Referable” Part Performance —...
Firmly Affixed Allonges and First‑Hand Mailing Proof as Nonnegotiable Conditions Precedent in New York Foreclosures: Onewest Bank FSB v. Thomas

Firmly Affixed Allonges and First‑Hand Mailing Proof as Nonnegotiable Conditions Precedent in New York Foreclosures: Onewest Bank FSB v. Thomas

Date: Oct 17, 2025
Firmly Affixed Allonges and First‑Hand Mailing Proof as Nonnegotiable Conditions Precedent in New York Foreclosures: Onewest Bank FSB v. Thomas Introduction In Onewest Bank FSB v. Thomas, 2025 NY...
Canon 3(C) Clarified: No Misconduct Where a Judge Promptly Invokes Article 154’s Ad Hoc Recusal Procedure; Thirty‑Day Suspension for Injudicious Demeanor

Canon 3(C) Clarified: No Misconduct Where a Judge Promptly Invokes Article 154’s Ad Hoc Recusal Procedure; Thirty‑Day Suspension for Injudicious Demeanor

Date: Oct 17, 2025
Canon 3(C) Clarified: No Misconduct Where a Judge Promptly Invokes Article 154’s Ad Hoc Recusal Procedure; Thirty‑Day Suspension for Injudicious Demeanor Introduction The Supreme Court of Louisiana’s...
Per-Unit Statute of Repose Under OCGA § 51-1-11(b)(2): Georgia Supreme Court Holds Repose Runs From the First Sale of Each Unit, Not From a Plaintiff’s Earliest Purchase

Per-Unit Statute of Repose Under OCGA § 51-1-11(b)(2): Georgia Supreme Court Holds Repose Runs From the First Sale of Each Unit, Not From a Plaintiff’s Earliest Purchase

Date: Oct 17, 2025
Per-Unit Statute of Repose Under OCGA § 51-1-11(b)(2): Georgia Supreme Court Holds Repose Runs From the First Sale of Each Unit, Not From a Plaintiff’s Earliest Purchase Introduction In Burroughs v....

      Georgia Supreme Court Bars Use of Arrest Warrants and Indictments for Impeachment Under OCGA § 24-6-609; Ineffective-Assistance Claims Fail Absent Prejudice — Commentary on Copney v. State (Ga. 2025)

Georgia Supreme Court Bars Use of Arrest Warrants and Indictments for Impeachment Under OCGA § 24-6-609; Ineffective-Assistance Claims Fail Absent Prejudice — Commentary on Copney v. State (Ga. 2025)

Date: Oct 17, 2025
Georgia Supreme Court Bars Use of Arrest Warrants and Indictments for Impeachment Under OCGA § 24-6-609; Ineffective-Assistance Claims Fail Absent Prejudice Introduction In Copney v. State, S25A0877...
Stormwater Utility Charges Are Fees, Not Taxes: Georgia Supreme Court Reaffirms Homewood I and Clarifies Takings Doctrine After Sheetz

Stormwater Utility Charges Are Fees, Not Taxes: Georgia Supreme Court Reaffirms Homewood I and Clarifies Takings Doctrine After Sheetz

Date: Oct 17, 2025
Stormwater Utility Charges Are Fees, Not Taxes: Georgia Supreme Court Reaffirms Homewood I and Clarifies Takings Doctrine After Sheetz Introduction In Homewood Associates, Inc. et al. v. Unified...
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