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

“Relating To” Re-Examined: Fifth Circuit Broadens the Scope of Predicate Sex-Offense Enhancements under 18 U.S.C. § 2252A(b)

“Relating To” Re-Examined: Fifth Circuit Broadens the Scope of Predicate Sex-Offense Enhancements under 18 U.S.C. § 2252A(b)

Date: Aug 6, 2025
“Relating To” Re-Examined: Fifth Circuit Broadens the Scope of Predicate Sex-Offense Enhancements under 18 U.S.C. § 2252A(b) 1. Introduction Case: United States v. Taylor, No. 24-20303 (5th Cir. Aug....
United States v. Guevara-Lopez: The Tenth Circuit Tightens the
Explanation Duty for Upward Variances and Invites Use of JSIN Statistics
to Police Sentencing Disparities

United States v. Guevara-Lopez: The Tenth Circuit Tightens the Explanation Duty for Upward Variances and Invites Use of JSIN Statistics to Police Sentencing Disparities

Date: Aug 6, 2025
United States v. Guevara-Lopez: A Tenth-Circuit Roadmap for Explaining Major Upward Variances & the Emerging Role of JSIN Data in § 3553(a)(6) Analysis 1. Introduction United States v. Guevara-Lopez,...
Gardner v. Momon: Fourth Circuit Reaffirms Grand-Jury Indictment as Conclusive Proof of Probable Cause in First-Amendment Retaliation & Excessive-Force Suits

Gardner v. Momon: Fourth Circuit Reaffirms Grand-Jury Indictment as Conclusive Proof of Probable Cause in First-Amendment Retaliation & Excessive-Force Suits

Date: Aug 6, 2025
Gardner v. Momon: Fourth Circuit Reaffirms Grand-Jury Indictment as Conclusive Proof of Probable Cause in First-Amendment Retaliation & Excessive-Force Suits Introduction The decision in Anthony...
Seabrook v. Driscoll: Heightened Pleading Standards for Temporal Proximity and Comparator Specificity under Title VII

Seabrook v. Driscoll: Heightened Pleading Standards for Temporal Proximity and Comparator Specificity under Title VII

Date: Aug 6, 2025
Seabrook v. Driscoll: Heightened Pleading Standards for Temporal Proximity and Comparator Specificity under Title VII 1. Introduction In Dorothy Seabrook v. Daniel P. Driscoll, No. 20-1961 (4th Cir....
“Regular Servicing Status” Clarified:  PACEM Solutions International, LLC v. U.S. Small Business Administration (4th Cir. 2025)

“Regular Servicing Status” Clarified: PACEM Solutions International, LLC v. U.S. Small Business Administration (4th Cir. 2025)

Date: Aug 6, 2025
“Regular Servicing Status” Clarified: PACEM Solutions International, LLC v. U.S. Small Business Administration 1. Introduction The Fourth Circuit’s published decision in PACEM Solutions...
When Silence Meets the Call Button: Hardy v. Rabie and the Tenth Circuit’s Clarification that Ignoring Repeated Emergency Signals Constitutes Clearly Established Deliberate Indifference

When Silence Meets the Call Button: Hardy v. Rabie and the Tenth Circuit’s Clarification that Ignoring Repeated Emergency Signals Constitutes Clearly Established Deliberate Indifference

Date: Aug 6, 2025
When Silence Meets the Call Button: Hardy v. Rabie and the Tenth Circuit’s Clarification that Ignoring Repeated Emergency Signals Constitutes Clearly Established Deliberate Indifference Introduction...
Rolle v. Wyoming DOC: Tenth Circuit Narrows §1983 “Failure-to-Train” Liability for Private Contractors and Confirms the Patient Self-Determination Act Does Not Apply to Prisons

Rolle v. Wyoming DOC: Tenth Circuit Narrows §1983 “Failure-to-Train” Liability for Private Contractors and Confirms the Patient Self-Determination Act Does Not Apply to Prisons

Date: Aug 6, 2025
Rolle v. Wyoming Department of Corrections Tenth Circuit Narrows §1983 “Failure-to-Train” Liability for Private Contractors and Confirms the Patient Self-Determination Act Does Not Apply to Prisons...
Case Comment: United States v. Campus — The Tenth Circuit Confirms that § 3A1.3’s Physical-Restraint Adjustment May Be Added When Distinct Conduct Shows Restraint Beyond the Core Offense

Case Comment: United States v. Campus — The Tenth Circuit Confirms that § 3A1.3’s Physical-Restraint Adjustment May Be Added When Distinct Conduct Shows Restraint Beyond the Core Offense

Date: Aug 6, 2025
United States v. Campus: Clarifying When the Physical-Restraint Adjustment Can Accompany an Offense-Specific Enhancement Introduction United States v. Campus, No. 24-5068 (10th Cir. Aug. 4, 2025),...
State v. Logston (2025): Constitutional Supremacy in Consecutive Sentencing After Probation Revocation

State v. Logston (2025): Constitutional Supremacy in Consecutive Sentencing After Probation Revocation

Date: Aug 6, 2025
State v. Logston (374 Or 101, 2025): Constitutional Supremacy in Consecutive Sentencing After Probation Revocation Introduction State v. Logston presented the Oregon Supreme Court with a narrow, but...
Jeffers and the Harmless-Error Doctrine: When the Absence of a Presentence Report Is Cured by a Mandatory Life-Without-Mercy Sentence

Jeffers and the Harmless-Error Doctrine: When the Absence of a Presentence Report Is Cured by a Mandatory Life-Without-Mercy Sentence

Date: Aug 6, 2025
Jeffers and the Harmless-Error Doctrine: When the Absence of a Presentence Report Is Cured by a Mandatory Life-Without-Mercy Sentence 1. Introduction In State of West Virginia v. Argie L. Jeffers,...
Beyond “Seal or Remove”: The Hawaiʻi Supreme Court Defines the Constitutional Limits of Record-Sealing under HRS § 831-3.2(f)

Beyond “Seal or Remove”: The Hawaiʻi Supreme Court Defines the Constitutional Limits of Record-Sealing under HRS § 831-3.2(f)

Date: Aug 6, 2025
Beyond “Seal or Remove”: The Hawaiʻi Supreme Court Defines the Constitutional Limits of Record-Sealing under HRS § 831-3.2(f) Introduction On 4 August 2025 the Supreme Court of Hawaiʻi issued a...
Sterling BV v. Cadillac Products Packaging Co.: Price-Quotes as Offers and the Enforceability of Consequential-Damage Waivers under the California UCC

Sterling BV v. Cadillac Products Packaging Co.: Price-Quotes as Offers and the Enforceability of Consequential-Damage Waivers under the California UCC

Date: Aug 6, 2025
Sterling BV, Inc. v. Cadillac Products Packaging Co. Price-Quotes as Offers and the Enforceability of Consequential-Damage Waivers under the California UCC Introduction What began in 2017 as an...
Intrinsic Evidence & Georgia Cocaine Convictions: United States v. Daise as a Dual-Holding on Rule 404(b) and Career-Offender Predicate Status

Intrinsic Evidence & Georgia Cocaine Convictions: United States v. Daise as a Dual-Holding on Rule 404(b) and Career-Offender Predicate Status

Date: Aug 6, 2025
Intrinsic Evidence & Georgia Cocaine Convictions: United States v. Daise as a Dual-Holding on Rule 404(b) and Career-Offender Predicate Status Introduction United States v. Barry Kiya Daise, No....
From Possibility to Probability: Sixth Circuit Clarifies Causation Standard in Tennessee Products-Liability Actions

From Possibility to Probability: Sixth Circuit Clarifies Causation Standard in Tennessee Products-Liability Actions

Date: Aug 6, 2025
From Possibility to Probability: Sixth Circuit Clarifies Causation Standard in Tennessee Products-Liability Actions Introduction This commentary examines the Sixth Circuit’s unpublished opinion in...
“Intent to Confine” Suffices: Eleventh Circuit Holds False-Imprisonment Judgments Are Nondischargeable under § 523(a)(6) Despite Debtor’s Good-Faith Belief

“Intent to Confine” Suffices: Eleventh Circuit Holds False-Imprisonment Judgments Are Nondischargeable under § 523(a)(6) Despite Debtor’s Good-Faith Belief

Date: Aug 6, 2025
“Intent to Confine” Suffices: Eleventh Circuit Holds False-Imprisonment Judgments Are Nondischargeable under § 523(a)(6) Despite Debtor’s Good-Faith Belief 1. Introduction The Court of Appeals for...
“Isolated Attorney Endorsements” and Strickland Prejudice: Seventh Circuit Clarifies Ineffective-Assistance Analysis under AEDPA

“Isolated Attorney Endorsements” and Strickland Prejudice: Seventh Circuit Clarifies Ineffective-Assistance Analysis under AEDPA

Date: Aug 6, 2025
“Isolated Attorney Endorsements” and Strickland Prejudice: Seventh Circuit Clarifies Ineffective-Assistance Analysis under AEDPA Introduction In Eric Benson Skeens v. Ron Neal, the United States...
Forfeiture at the Hearing: Cain v. Bisignano Solidifies the Seventh Circuit Rule on Vocational-Expert Objections and Reaffirms the “Minimal Articulation” Standard

Forfeiture at the Hearing: Cain v. Bisignano Solidifies the Seventh Circuit Rule on Vocational-Expert Objections and Reaffirms the “Minimal Articulation” Standard

Date: Aug 6, 2025
Forfeiture at the Hearing: Cain v. Bisignano Solidifies the Seventh Circuit Rule on Vocational-Expert Objections and Reaffirms the “Minimal Articulation” Standard Introduction In Jonathan D. Cain v....
Seventh Circuit Tightens the Nexus and Relocation Requirements in Cartel-Violence Claims:  P.A-V. v. Bondi (2025)

Seventh Circuit Tightens the Nexus and Relocation Requirements in Cartel-Violence Claims: P.A-V. v. Bondi (2025)

Date: Aug 6, 2025
Seventh Circuit Tightens the Nexus and Relocation Requirements in Cartel-Violence Claims: Commentary on P. A.-V. v. Bondi, 21-2737 (7th Cir. 2025) 1. Introduction P. A.-V. v. Bondi is the latest in a...
The “Otherwise-Applicable Guideline Range” Doctrine: Seventh Circuit Re-Affirms Deference to Commentary When Calculating Career-Offender Sentences under § 4B1.1(c)(2)

The “Otherwise-Applicable Guideline Range” Doctrine: Seventh Circuit Re-Affirms Deference to Commentary When Calculating Career-Offender Sentences under § 4B1.1(c)(2)

Date: Aug 6, 2025
The “Otherwise-Applicable Guideline Range” Doctrine: United States v. Daniel Stewart (7th Cir. 2025) Introduction In United States v. Daniel Stewart, the Seventh Circuit tackled a thorny question in...
Extending the Moeller Symmetry: Alaska Supreme Court Requires Symmetrical Custody Analysis for Significant In-State Relocations and Re-Affirms the Statutory Preference for Joint Legal Custody

Extending the Moeller Symmetry: Alaska Supreme Court Requires Symmetrical Custody Analysis for Significant In-State Relocations and Re-Affirms the Statutory Preference for Joint Legal Custody

Date: Aug 6, 2025
Extending the Moeller Symmetry: Alaska Supreme Court Requires Symmetrical Custody Analysis for Significant In-State Relocations and Re-Affirms the Statutory Preference for Joint Legal Custody...
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