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

clarifying-the-& Case Commentaries

Florida Supreme Court Front-Loads Postconviction Pleading and Expert Disclosures: New Specificity Requirements for “Failure to Call Witnesses” Ineffective-Assistance Claims and Clarified DNA-Testing Appeal Time

Florida Supreme Court Front-Loads Postconviction Pleading and Expert Disclosures: New Specificity Requirements for “Failure to Call Witnesses” Ineffective-Assistance Claims and Clarified DNA-Testing Appeal Time

Date: Sep 27, 2025
Florida Supreme Court Front-Loads Postconviction Pleading and Expert Disclosures: New Specificity Requirements for “Failure to Call Witnesses” Ineffective-Assistance Claims and Clarified DNA-Testing...
No Exhaustion Without Sworn Proof: Third Circuit Reinforces Declaration Requirement in PLRA Disputes (Payne v. Gourley)

No Exhaustion Without Sworn Proof: Third Circuit Reinforces Declaration Requirement in PLRA Disputes (Payne v. Gourley)

Date: Sep 26, 2025
No Exhaustion Without Sworn Proof: Third Circuit Reinforces Declaration Requirement in PLRA Disputes Commentary on Payne v. Gourley, No. 25-1765 (3d Cir. Sept. 24, 2025) (nonprecedential)...
Acceptance of Responsibility Cannot Be Denied Based Solely on Pre‑Notice Arrest Conduct: Third Circuit Vacates Sentence in United States v. Guerrero Grimaldos

Acceptance of Responsibility Cannot Be Denied Based Solely on Pre‑Notice Arrest Conduct: Third Circuit Vacates Sentence in United States v. Guerrero Grimaldos

Date: Sep 26, 2025
Acceptance of Responsibility Cannot Be Denied Based Solely on Pre‑Notice Arrest Conduct: Third Circuit Vacates Sentence in United States v. Guerrero Grimaldos Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the...
Rebutting the SGA Presumption Requires Concrete Proof of Subsidy: Fourth Circuit Affirms Step-Four Denial Based on Religious Employment and “As Actually Performed” Past Work

Rebutting the SGA Presumption Requires Concrete Proof of Subsidy: Fourth Circuit Affirms Step-Four Denial Based on Religious Employment and “As Actually Performed” Past Work

Date: Sep 26, 2025
Rebutting the SGA Presumption Requires Concrete Proof of Subsidy: Fourth Circuit Affirms Step-Four Denial Based on Religious Employment and “As Actually Performed” Past Work Case: William Kinlaw v....
Available, Unused Safety Devices Create Triable Issues Under Labor Law § 240(1) in Roof‑Hatch Falls; Conclusory Motions to Strike Affirmative Defenses Rejected

Available, Unused Safety Devices Create Triable Issues Under Labor Law § 240(1) in Roof‑Hatch Falls; Conclusory Motions to Strike Affirmative Defenses Rejected

Date: Sep 26, 2025
Available, Unused Safety Devices Create Triable Issues Under Labor Law § 240(1) in Roof‑Hatch Falls; Conclusory Motions to Strike Affirmative Defenses Rejected Case: Blachowicz v. City of New York,...
Blank v. Acker: Emails and Revocable Wills Cannot Enforce Oral Promises to Devise Real Property; Lease Terms Defeat Unjust Enrichment; Subjective Performance Critiques Are Nonactionable Opinion

Blank v. Acker: Emails and Revocable Wills Cannot Enforce Oral Promises to Devise Real Property; Lease Terms Defeat Unjust Enrichment; Subjective Performance Critiques Are Nonactionable Opinion

Date: Sep 26, 2025
Blank v. Acker: Emails and Revocable Wills Cannot Enforce Oral Promises to Devise Real Property; Lease Terms Defeat Unjust Enrichment; Subjective Performance Critiques Are Nonactionable Opinion...
GBL § 349, Article 36‑A, and Lien Law Article 3‑A Do Not Create an Independent Tort Duty for Contractors: Second Department Refines Pleading Boundaries in Home-Renovation Disputes (Kovalenko v. Bhatti Gen. Contr. & Dev., LLC)

GBL § 349, Article 36‑A, and Lien Law Article 3‑A Do Not Create an Independent Tort Duty for Contractors: Second Department Refines Pleading Boundaries in Home-Renovation Disputes (Kovalenko v. Bhatti Gen. Contr. & Dev., LLC)

Date: Sep 26, 2025
GBL § 349, Article 36‑A, and Lien Law Article 3‑A Do Not Create an Independent Tort Duty for Contractors: Second Department Refines Pleading Boundaries in Home-Renovation Disputes Case: Kovalenko v....
When the Accident Itself Is in Dispute: Second Department Clarifies CPLR 4404(a) and Endorses Jury Instructions Allowing Non‑Occurrence Findings

When the Accident Itself Is in Dispute: Second Department Clarifies CPLR 4404(a) and Endorses Jury Instructions Allowing Non‑Occurrence Findings

Date: Sep 26, 2025
When the Accident Itself Is in Dispute: Second Department Clarifies CPLR 4404(a) and Endorses Jury Instructions Allowing Non‑Occurrence Findings Introduction In Krohn v. Schultz Ford Lincoln, Inc.,...
Matter of Brody: Disbarment by Consent with Restitution Convertible to a Civil Judgment under Judiciary Law § 90(6-a)

Matter of Brody: Disbarment by Consent with Restitution Convertible to a Civil Judgment under Judiciary Law § 90(6-a)

Date: Sep 26, 2025
Matter of Brody: Disbarment by Consent with Restitution Convertible to a Civil Judgment under Judiciary Law § 90(6-a) Introduction In Matter of Brody, 2025 NY Slip Op 05079 (Appellate Division,...
Consent Discipline for Neglect and Communication Failures: Second Department Affirms One‑Year Suspension and Underscores Bankruptcy Reporting Duties (Matter of Mulhearn, 2025)

Consent Discipline for Neglect and Communication Failures: Second Department Affirms One‑Year Suspension and Underscores Bankruptcy Reporting Duties (Matter of Mulhearn, 2025)

Date: Sep 26, 2025
Consent Discipline for Neglect and Communication Failures: Second Department Affirms One‑Year Suspension and Underscores Bankruptcy Reporting Duties Matter of Mulhearn, 2025 NY Slip Op 05086 (App....
Misdemeanor Tax Fraud as a “Serious Crime” Meriting a Prospective Six‑Month Suspension: Matter of Ortega

Misdemeanor Tax Fraud as a “Serious Crime” Meriting a Prospective Six‑Month Suspension: Matter of Ortega

Date: Sep 26, 2025
Misdemeanor Tax Fraud as a “Serious Crime” Meriting a Prospective Six‑Month Suspension: Matter of Ortega Court: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court, Second Department (Per Curiam) Decision Date:...
Only the CBA’s Named Parties May Demand Arbitration: Representative’s Signature Alone Does Not Confer Party Status

Only the CBA’s Named Parties May Demand Arbitration: Representative’s Signature Alone Does Not Confer Party Status

Date: Sep 26, 2025
Only the CBA’s Named Parties May Demand Arbitration: Representative’s Signature Alone Does Not Confer Party Status Introduction In Matter of Village of Walden v. Teamsters Local Union No. 445, the...
Meikle v. Medcare, LLC: Permanent Disability Allegations Open HIV, Mental Health, and Substance-Use Records to Discovery, With Mandatory Public Health Law § 2785(3) Protections

Meikle v. Medcare, LLC: Permanent Disability Allegations Open HIV, Mental Health, and Substance-Use Records to Discovery, With Mandatory Public Health Law § 2785(3) Protections

Date: Sep 26, 2025
Meikle v. Medcare, LLC: Permanent Disability Allegations Open HIV, Mental Health, and Substance-Use Records to Discovery, With Mandatory Public Health Law § 2785(3) Protections Introduction In Meikle...
People v. Reaves: New York Tightens Admissibility of Rap Lyrics—Qualified Expertise, Specific Nexus, and Molineux Balancing Required

People v. Reaves: New York Tightens Admissibility of Rap Lyrics—Qualified Expertise, Specific Nexus, and Molineux Balancing Required

Date: Sep 26, 2025
People v. Reaves: New York Tightens Admissibility of Rap Lyrics—Qualified Expertise, Specific Nexus, and Molineux Balancing Required Introduction In People v. Reaves, 2025 NY Slip Op 05107 (App Div,...
Second Department Clarifies: Waiving a Deficiency Judgment Does Not Eliminate the Borrower as a Necessary Party in Foreclosure

Second Department Clarifies: Waiving a Deficiency Judgment Does Not Eliminate the Borrower as a Necessary Party in Foreclosure

Date: Sep 26, 2025
Second Department Clarifies: Waiving a Deficiency Judgment Does Not Eliminate the Borrower as a Necessary Party in Foreclosure Introduction In Wilmington Savings Fund Society, FSB v. Loubriel, 2025...
Eligibility Confirmation Under §16.63 Is Not Newly Discovered Evidence: Florida Supreme Court Tightens Successive Mitigation and Post‑Warrant Records Practice in Capital Cases

Eligibility Confirmation Under §16.63 Is Not Newly Discovered Evidence: Florida Supreme Court Tightens Successive Mitigation and Post‑Warrant Records Practice in Capital Cases

Date: Sep 26, 2025
Eligibility Confirmation Under §16.63 Is Not Newly Discovered Evidence: Florida Supreme Court Tightens Successive Mitigation and Post‑Warrant Records Practice in Capital Cases Introduction In Victor...
Second Circuit reaffirms: Gang defection is not “political opinion” and CAT relief demands individualized proof and government acquiescence

Second Circuit reaffirms: Gang defection is not “political opinion” and CAT relief demands individualized proof and government acquiescence

Date: Sep 26, 2025
Second Circuit reaffirms: Gang defection is not “political opinion” and CAT relief demands individualized proof and government acquiescence Introduction In Ramirez Alvarado v. Bondi (No. 21-6603,...
Umarov v. Bondi: Second Circuit Reaffirms Nonreviewability of BIA’s Sua Sponte Reopening and Declines to Treat Pereira/Niz‑Chavez Eligibility as Exceptional

Umarov v. Bondi: Second Circuit Reaffirms Nonreviewability of BIA’s Sua Sponte Reopening and Declines to Treat Pereira/Niz‑Chavez Eligibility as Exceptional

Date: Sep 26, 2025
Umarov v. Bondi: Second Circuit Reaffirms Nonreviewability of BIA’s Sua Sponte Reopening and Declines to Treat Pereira/Niz‑Chavez Eligibility as Exceptional Introduction In a nonprecedential summary...
Signing ICC Terms of Reference as “Clear and Unmistakable” Delegation of Arbitrability: Eleventh Circuit Affirms Confirmation Against a Non‑Signatory Under the New York Convention

Signing ICC Terms of Reference as “Clear and Unmistakable” Delegation of Arbitrability: Eleventh Circuit Affirms Confirmation Against a Non‑Signatory Under the New York Convention

Date: Sep 26, 2025
Signing ICC Terms of Reference as “Clear and Unmistakable” Delegation of Arbitrability: Eleventh Circuit Affirms Confirmation Against a Non‑Signatory Under the New York Convention Introduction This...
No Industry Standard, No Immunity: Eleventh Circuit Holds Standard of Care and Causation Are Jury Questions in Negligent-Work Exclusion vs. “Equipment Breakdown” Coverage Disputes

No Industry Standard, No Immunity: Eleventh Circuit Holds Standard of Care and Causation Are Jury Questions in Negligent-Work Exclusion vs. “Equipment Breakdown” Coverage Disputes

Date: Sep 26, 2025
No Industry Standard, No Immunity: Eleventh Circuit Holds Standard of Care and Causation Are Jury Questions in Negligent-Work Exclusion vs. “Equipment Breakdown” Coverage Disputes Introduction This...
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