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

clarifying-the-& Case Commentaries

Affirmation of Zero Child Support in Cases of Equal Income and Equal Physical Custody under Alaska Civil Rule 90.3

Affirmation of Zero Child Support in Cases of Equal Income and Equal Physical Custody under Alaska Civil Rule 90.3

Date: Jun 26, 2025
Affirmation of Zero Child Support in Cases of Equal Income and Equal Physical Custody under Alaska Civil Rule 90.3 1. Introduction In Joseph Vann Riggs III v. Amber Dawn Mason-Riggs, the Supreme...
Stay Requests That Only Pause Litigation Are NOT “Proceedings”: Commentary on Emilio Paredes v. Azachorok, Inc.

Stay Requests That Only Pause Litigation Are NOT “Proceedings”: Commentary on Emilio Paredes v. Azachorok, Inc.

Date: Jun 26, 2025
Stay Requests That Only Pause Litigation Are NOT “Proceedings” Under Alaska Civil Rule 41(e) Introduction In Emilio Paredes v. Azachorok, Inc. & Azachorok Contract Services, LLC, the Alaska Supreme...
“Unmistakable Clarity” Required: United States v. Maldonado-Negroni and the Harmless-Error Test for Guideline Miscalculations

“Unmistakable Clarity” Required: United States v. Maldonado-Negroni and the Harmless-Error Test for Guideline Miscalculations

Date: Jun 25, 2025
“Unmistakable Clarity” Required: United States v. Maldonado-Negroni and the Harmless-Error Test for Guideline Miscalculations 1. Introduction United States v. Maldonado-Negroni, No. 23-1768 (1st Cir....
“No Party, No Standing” – The Third Circuit’s Clarification on Contractual Standing for County Election Boards

“No Party, No Standing” – The Third Circuit’s Clarification on Contractual Standing for County Election Boards

Date: Jun 25, 2025
“No Party, No Standing” – The Third Circuit’s Clarification on Contractual Standing for County Election Boards Introduction Fulton County v. Dominion Voting Systems Inc. (3d Cir. No. 24-2771, 23 June...

The “Holistic-Meyers” Revival and a Refined Wright-Line Remand: A Commentary on Miller Plastic Products Inc v. NLRB

The “Holistic-Meyers” Revival and a Refined Wright-Line Remand: A Commentary on Miller Plastic Products Inc v. NLRB

Date: Jun 25, 2025
The “Holistic-Meyers” Revival and a Refined Wright-Line Remand: Commentary on Miller Plastic Products Inc v. NLRB (3d Cir. 2025) 1. Introduction On 23 June 2025, the United States Court of Appeals...
“Beyond the Alstate Checklist” — The Third Circuit Re-embraces a Holistic Test for Concerted Activity after Loper Bright (Commentary on NLRB v. Miller Plastic Products Inc.)

“Beyond the Alstate Checklist” — The Third Circuit Re-embraces a Holistic Test for Concerted Activity after Loper Bright (Commentary on NLRB v. Miller Plastic Products Inc.)

Date: Jun 25, 2025
“Beyond the Alstate Checklist” — The Third Circuit Re-embraces a Holistic Test for Concerted Activity after Loper Bright Commentary on NLRB v. Miller Plastic Products Inc., 2025 1. Introduction...
When Consideration Fails: Third Circuit Recognises Rescission of Settlement Agreements Where a Dependent Covenant Is Breached

When Consideration Fails: Third Circuit Recognises Rescission of Settlement Agreements Where a Dependent Covenant Is Breached

Date: Jun 25, 2025
When Consideration Fails: Third Circuit Recognises Rescission of Settlement Agreements Where a Dependent Covenant Is Breached 1. Introduction Point Blank Protective Apparel & Uniforms LLC (“Point...
“Temporal-and-Conceptual Distinctness” after Clark v. Louisiana DPS&C: A Refined Heck Bar for Section 1983 Excessive-Force Claims Arising from Prison Disciplinary Convictions

“Temporal-and-Conceptual Distinctness” after Clark v. Louisiana DPS&C: A Refined Heck Bar for Section 1983 Excessive-Force Claims Arising from Prison Disciplinary Convictions

Date: Jun 25, 2025
“Temporal-and-Conceptual Distinctness” after Clark v. Louisiana Department of Public Safety & Corrections: A Refined Heck Bar for Section 1983 Excessive-Force Claims Arising from Prison Disciplinary...
“Clearly Established” Curtilage Law and Qualified Immunity After Sauceda v. Lopez (Sauceda II)

“Clearly Established” Curtilage Law and Qualified Immunity After Sauceda v. Lopez (Sauceda II)

Date: Jun 25, 2025
“Clearly Established” Curtilage Law and Qualified Immunity After Sauceda v. Lopez (Sauceda II) 1. Introduction Sauceda v. Lopez, No. 24-40174 (5th Cir. 2025), nick-named “Sauceda II,” is the Fifth...
United States v. Griffin: Heightened Appellate Deference to District-Court Credibility Findings in § 2255 Ineffective-Assistance Hearings

United States v. Griffin: Heightened Appellate Deference to District-Court Credibility Findings in § 2255 Ineffective-Assistance Hearings

Date: Jun 25, 2025
United States v. Griffin: Heightened Appellate Deference to District-Court Credibility Findings in § 2255 Ineffective-Assistance Hearings 1. Introduction United States v. Griffin, No. 22-60453 (5th...
“Chinnery v. Kaiser” – The Fourth Circuit Reaffirms the Minimal Pleading Standard for Sincerity in Title VII Religious-Accommodation Claims

“Chinnery v. Kaiser” – The Fourth Circuit Reaffirms the Minimal Pleading Standard for Sincerity in Title VII Religious-Accommodation Claims

Date: Jun 25, 2025
Chinnery v. Kaiser: The Fourth Circuit Reaffirms the Minimal Pleading Standard for Sincerity in Title VII Religious-Accommodation Claims Introduction The unpublished opinion in Naisha Chinnery v....
United States v. Adams: Fourth Circuit Re-Affirms the “Central Thesis” Standard for Sentencing Explanations

United States v. Adams: Fourth Circuit Re-Affirms the “Central Thesis” Standard for Sentencing Explanations

Date: Jun 25, 2025
United States v. Adams: Fourth Circuit Re-Affirms the “Central Thesis” Standard for Sentencing Explanations Introduction The Fourth Circuit’s unpublished decision in United States v. Maurice Adams...
United States v. Yelizarov: Narrowing the “Miscarriage-of-Justice” Escape Hatch to Appellate-Waiver Clauses After a § 924(c) Vacatur

United States v. Yelizarov: Narrowing the “Miscarriage-of-Justice” Escape Hatch to Appellate-Waiver Clauses After a § 924(c) Vacatur

Date: Jun 25, 2025
United States v. Yelizarov: Narrowing the “Miscarriage-of-Justice” Escape Hatch to Appellate-Waiver Clauses After a § 924(c) Vacatur Introduction The Fourth Circuit’s published decision in United...
Fourth Circuit Clarifies Enforceability of Appeal-Waivers after § 924(c) Vacatur: A Commentary on United States v. Stanislav Yelizarov (2025)

Fourth Circuit Clarifies Enforceability of Appeal-Waivers after § 924(c) Vacatur: A Commentary on United States v. Stanislav Yelizarov (2025)

Date: Jun 25, 2025
Fourth Circuit Clarifies Enforceability of Appeal-Waivers after § 924(c) Vacatur: A Commentary on United States v. Stanislav Yelizarov (2025) 1. Introduction In United States v. Stanislav Yelizarov,...
Biers v. Dentons US: Tenth Circuit Clarifies Appealability of Interlocutory Orders and Reinforces Limits on Stand-Alone Cross-Claims

Biers v. Dentons US: Tenth Circuit Clarifies Appealability of Interlocutory Orders and Reinforces Limits on Stand-Alone Cross-Claims

Date: Jun 25, 2025
Biers v. Dentons US: Tenth Circuit Clarifies Appealability of Interlocutory Orders and Reinforces Limits on Stand-Alone Cross-Claims Introduction In Biers v. Dentons US LLP, the United States Court...
Teetz v. Stepien: The Tenth Circuit Brands Prolonged Prone Restraint of a Subdued Detainee as “Deadly Force”

Teetz v. Stepien: The Tenth Circuit Brands Prolonged Prone Restraint of a Subdued Detainee as “Deadly Force”

Date: Jun 25, 2025
Teetz v. Stepien: The Tenth Circuit Brands Prolonged Prone Restraint of a Subdued Detainee as “Deadly Force” Introduction In Teetz v. Stepien, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit...
Always Compare the Defendant to Actual Participants: Berryhill’s Clarification of § 3B1.2 Mitigating-Role Analysis

Always Compare the Defendant to Actual Participants: Berryhill’s Clarification of § 3B1.2 Mitigating-Role Analysis

Date: Jun 25, 2025
Always Compare the Defendant to Actual Participants: United States v. Berryhill and the Clarified Duty to Perform a Relative-Culpability Analysis Under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2 Introduction United States v....

        United States v. Roark: Tenth Circuit Clarifies (1) When Failure to Give a Specific-Unanimity Instruction Constitutes Reversible Plain Error and 
        (2) A District Court’s Power to Vacate Its Own Erroneous Rule 29 Acquittal Without Offending Double Jeopardy

United States v. Roark: Tenth Circuit Clarifies (1) When Failure to Give a Specific-Unanimity Instruction Constitutes Reversible Plain Error and (2) A District Court’s Power to Vacate Its Own Erroneous Rule 29 Acquittal Without Offending Double Jeopardy

Date: Jun 25, 2025
United States v. Roark: Tenth Circuit Clarifies (1) When Failure to Give a Specific-Unanimity Instruction Constitutes Reversible Plain Error and (2) A District Court’s Power to Vacate Its Own...
Dismissal without Prejudice for Corporate Suspension Does Not Constitute “Favorable Termination” in Malicious-Prosecution Actions – A Commentary on Wyles v. Sussman (10th Cir. 2025)

Dismissal without Prejudice for Corporate Suspension Does Not Constitute “Favorable Termination” in Malicious-Prosecution Actions – A Commentary on Wyles v. Sussman (10th Cir. 2025)

Date: Jun 25, 2025
Dismissal without Prejudice for Corporate Suspension Does Not Constitute “Favorable Termination” in Malicious-Prosecution Actions A Comprehensive Commentary on Wyles v. Sussman, 10th Cir., 23 June...
“Improvidently Granted” Dismissals Must Be Explained:  A Commentary on Scot Van Oudenhoven v. Wisconsin DOJ, 2025 WI 25

“Improvidently Granted” Dismissals Must Be Explained: A Commentary on Scot Van Oudenhoven v. Wisconsin DOJ, 2025 WI 25

Date: Jun 25, 2025
“Improvidently Granted” Dismissals Must Be Explained: The Wisconsin Supreme Court’s Continuing Debate in Scot Van Oudenhoven v. Wisconsin Department of Justice, 2025 WI 25 1. Introduction The...
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