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-&amp Case Commentaries

Commonwealth v. Lewis: Pennsylvania Supreme Court Retains “High‑Crime Area” as a Terry Factor, Offers Non‑Mandatory Guideposts; Justice Wecht Urges Its Abandonment Under Article I, Section 8

Commonwealth v. Lewis: Pennsylvania Supreme Court Retains “High‑Crime Area” as a Terry Factor, Offers Non‑Mandatory Guideposts; Justice Wecht Urges Its Abandonment Under Article I, Section 8

Date: Sep 27, 2025
Commonwealth v. Lewis: Pennsylvania Supreme Court Retains “High‑Crime Area” as a Terry Factor, Offers Non‑Mandatory Guideposts; Justice Wecht Urges Its Abandonment Under Article I, Section 8 Court:...
Post-Strunk Application of §6318: Verbal Pre‑Assault Commands as “Communication” — Justice Mundy’s Concurrence/Dissent in Commonwealth v. Smith (Pa. 2025)

Post-Strunk Application of §6318: Verbal Pre‑Assault Commands as “Communication” — Justice Mundy’s Concurrence/Dissent in Commonwealth v. Smith (Pa. 2025)

Date: Sep 27, 2025
Post-Strunk Application of §6318: Verbal Pre‑Assault Commands as “Communication” — Justice Mundy’s Concurrence/Dissent in Commonwealth v. Smith (Pa. 2025) Introduction This commentary examines...
Post-Strunk Application of 18 Pa.C.S. § 6318: Verbal Commands as “Communication” for Unlawful Contact with a Minor — Justice Mundy’s Concurrence/Dissent in Commonwealth v. Smith

Post-Strunk Application of 18 Pa.C.S. § 6318: Verbal Commands as “Communication” for Unlawful Contact with a Minor — Justice Mundy’s Concurrence/Dissent in Commonwealth v. Smith

Date: Sep 27, 2025
Post-Strunk Application of 18 Pa.C.S. § 6318: Verbal Commands as “Communication” for Unlawful Contact with a Minor — Justice Mundy’s Concurrence/Dissent in Commonwealth v. Smith Introduction In...
Context Over Text: Pennsylvania Supreme Court Upholds DOH’s Two‑Lab Testing Rule Under the Medical Marijuana Act (Wecht, J., dissenting)

Context Over Text: Pennsylvania Supreme Court Upholds DOH’s Two‑Lab Testing Rule Under the Medical Marijuana Act (Wecht, J., dissenting)

Date: Sep 27, 2025
Context Over Text: Pennsylvania Supreme Court Upholds DOH’s Two‑Lab Testing Rule Under the Medical Marijuana Act (Wecht, J., dissenting) Introduction In Green Analytics North, LLC v. Department of...
Limiting “Other Person Under the Tenant’s Control” to the Initial Invitation Onto the Premises: Justice Wecht’s Dissent in Housing Authority of the City of Pittsburgh v. Nash

Limiting “Other Person Under the Tenant’s Control” to the Initial Invitation Onto the Premises: Justice Wecht’s Dissent in Housing Authority of the City of Pittsburgh v. Nash

Date: Sep 27, 2025
Limiting “Other Person Under the Tenant’s Control” to the Initial Invitation Onto the Premises: Justice Wecht’s Dissent in Housing Authority of the City of Pittsburgh v. Nash Introduction This...
On‑Bill Billing and the Limits of Section 1502: Pennsylvania Supreme Court Holds Non‑Electric Add‑Ons Fall Outside “Service”; Scope of “All Electric Services” Reserved

On‑Bill Billing and the Limits of Section 1502: Pennsylvania Supreme Court Holds Non‑Electric Add‑Ons Fall Outside “Service”; Scope of “All Electric Services” Reserved

Date: Sep 27, 2025
On‑Bill Billing and the Limits of Section 1502: Pennsylvania Supreme Court Holds Non‑Electric Add‑Ons Fall Outside “Service”; Scope of “All Electric Services” Reserved Introduction In Interstate Gas...
Uniformity in Effect, Not Form: Denial of Local Tax Credits to Nonresidents Renders Pittsburgh’s Facility Fee Unconstitutional under Pennsylvania’s Uniformity Clause

Uniformity in Effect, Not Form: Denial of Local Tax Credits to Nonresidents Renders Pittsburgh’s Facility Fee Unconstitutional under Pennsylvania’s Uniformity Clause

Date: Sep 27, 2025
Uniformity in Effect, Not Form: Denial of Local Tax Credits to Nonresidents Renders Pittsburgh’s Facility Fee Unconstitutional under Pennsylvania’s Uniformity Clause Introduction In National Hockey...
Tranter v. Z&D Tour: Pennsylvania High Court Rejects “Key Witness” Requirement and Articulates a 100‑Mile Benchmark in Forum Non Conveniens Analysis

Tranter v. Z&D Tour: Pennsylvania High Court Rejects “Key Witness” Requirement and Articulates a 100‑Mile Benchmark in Forum Non Conveniens Analysis

Date: Sep 27, 2025
Tranter v. Z&D Tour: Pennsylvania High Court Rejects “Key Witness” Requirement and Articulates a 100‑Mile Benchmark in Forum Non Conveniens Analysis Introduction In a set of consolidated appeals...
Rule 33.1 Specificity Controls: Self-Defense Sufficiency Not Preserved by Intent-Only Motion; Figurative, Non‑Matching Threats Are Admissible to Prove Intent; 4‑3(a) Review Permitted on State’s Adverse‑Rulings List

Rule 33.1 Specificity Controls: Self-Defense Sufficiency Not Preserved by Intent-Only Motion; Figurative, Non‑Matching Threats Are Admissible to Prove Intent; 4‑3(a) Review Permitted on State’s Adverse‑Rulings List

Date: Sep 27, 2025
Rule 33.1 Specificity Controls: Self-Defense Sufficiency Not Preserved by Intent-Only Motion; Figurative, Non‑Matching Threats Are Admissible to Prove Intent; 4‑3(a) Review Permitted on State’s...
Stand-Your-Ground’s Initial-Aggressor Limit Clarified; Voir Dire on Lesser Burdens May Be Curtailed: Collins v. State, 2025 Ark. 137

Stand-Your-Ground’s Initial-Aggressor Limit Clarified; Voir Dire on Lesser Burdens May Be Curtailed: Collins v. State, 2025 Ark. 137

Date: Sep 27, 2025
Stand-Your-Ground’s Initial-Aggressor Limit Clarified; Voir Dire on Lesser Burdens May Be Curtailed: Collins v. State, 2025 Ark. 137 Introduction In Dylan Collins v. State of Arkansas, 2025 Ark. 137,...
Pleading Specific Conviction Dates Is Required to Overcome Sovereign Immunity in Arkansas Parole-Eligibility Challenges

Pleading Specific Conviction Dates Is Required to Overcome Sovereign Immunity in Arkansas Parole-Eligibility Challenges

Date: Sep 27, 2025
Pleading Specific Conviction Dates Is Required to Overcome Sovereign Immunity in Arkansas Parole-Eligibility Challenges Case: Jeremy Kennedy v. Arkansas Parole Board and Arkansas Division of...
Full Interview Recordings Can Cure Suppression-Hearing Playback Gaps: Arkansas Supreme Court Clarifies Record-Settlement Sufficiency and Reaffirms Purposeful-Discharge Mens Rea for Drive-By Capital Murder

Full Interview Recordings Can Cure Suppression-Hearing Playback Gaps: Arkansas Supreme Court Clarifies Record-Settlement Sufficiency and Reaffirms Purposeful-Discharge Mens Rea for Drive-By Capital Murder

Date: Sep 27, 2025
Full Interview Recordings Can Cure Suppression-Hearing Playback Gaps: Arkansas Supreme Court Clarifies Record-Settlement Sufficiency and Reaffirms Purposeful-Discharge Mens Rea for Drive-By Capital...
Vasquez v. State (2025 Ark. 134): Good-Faith Reliance on an Unrecorded Oral Nexus for a Cell-Phone Warrant; Character-Impeachment Missteps Held Harmless

Vasquez v. State (2025 Ark. 134): Good-Faith Reliance on an Unrecorded Oral Nexus for a Cell-Phone Warrant; Character-Impeachment Missteps Held Harmless

Date: Sep 27, 2025
Good-Faith Reliance on an Unrecorded Oral Nexus for a Cell-Phone Warrant; Character-Impeachment Missteps Held Harmless Case: Santiago Vasquez, Jr. v. State of Arkansas, 2025 Ark. 134 (Supreme Court...
No Contested Hearing Required to Accept Tribal Customary Adoption: Oregon Supreme Court Clarifies ORS 419B.656 and Affirms Tribal–State Shared Roles under ORICWA

No Contested Hearing Required to Accept Tribal Customary Adoption: Oregon Supreme Court Clarifies ORS 419B.656 and Affirms Tribal–State Shared Roles under ORICWA

Date: Sep 27, 2025
No Contested Hearing Required to Accept Tribal Customary Adoption: Oregon Supreme Court Clarifies ORS 419B.656 and Affirms Tribal–State Shared Roles under ORICWA Introduction In Dept. of Human...
ORS 12.125 Contains No Discovery Rule: One-Year Limit for ORLTA and Rental Agreement Claims Runs from Breach or Violation

ORS 12.125 Contains No Discovery Rule: One-Year Limit for ORLTA and Rental Agreement Claims Runs from Breach or Violation

Date: Sep 27, 2025
ORS 12.125 Contains No Discovery Rule: One-Year Limit for ORLTA and Rental Agreement Claims Runs from Breach or Violation Introduction In Hathaway v. B & J Property Investments, Inc., 374 Or 212...
In re Abel: Oregon Supreme Court Clarifies “Actual Knowledge” for RPC 8.4(a)(3) and Uses Objective Indicators to Prove It; False Criminal Threats in Demand Letters Merit Suspension

In re Abel: Oregon Supreme Court Clarifies “Actual Knowledge” for RPC 8.4(a)(3) and Uses Objective Indicators to Prove It; False Criminal Threats in Demand Letters Merit Suspension

Date: Sep 27, 2025
In re Abel: Oregon Supreme Court Clarifies “Actual Knowledge” for RPC 8.4(a)(3) and Uses Objective Indicators to Prove It; False Criminal Threats in Demand Letters Merit Suspension Citation: In re...
No Asportation Without Increased Isolation or Control: State v. Anderson Refines Oregon’s Kidnapping Standard and Confirms Property-Directed Violence Can Constitute Menacing

No Asportation Without Increased Isolation or Control: State v. Anderson Refines Oregon’s Kidnapping Standard and Confirms Property-Directed Violence Can Constitute Menacing

Date: Sep 27, 2025
No Asportation Without Increased Isolation or Control: State v. Anderson Refines Oregon’s Kidnapping Standard and Confirms Property-Directed Violence Can Constitute Menacing Introduction In State v....
Mandatory Relief Upon a Case‑Specific Showing of Prejudice from Joinder: The Oregon Supreme Court’s Clarification of ORS 132.560(3) in State v. Hernandez‑Esteban

Mandatory Relief Upon a Case‑Specific Showing of Prejudice from Joinder: The Oregon Supreme Court’s Clarification of ORS 132.560(3) in State v. Hernandez‑Esteban

Date: Sep 27, 2025
Mandatory Relief Upon a Case‑Specific Showing of Prejudice from Joinder: The Oregon Supreme Court’s Clarification of ORS 132.560(3) in State v. Hernandez‑Esteban Introduction In State v....
WRME Eligibility Turns on Insurer’s Current Reliance on an IME: Oregon Supreme Court Adopts a “Time-of-Decision” Test in Teitelman v. SAIF

WRME Eligibility Turns on Insurer’s Current Reliance on an IME: Oregon Supreme Court Adopts a “Time-of-Decision” Test in Teitelman v. SAIF

Date: Sep 27, 2025
WRME Eligibility Turns on Insurer’s Current Reliance on an IME: Oregon Supreme Court Adopts a “Time-of-Decision” Test in Teitelman v. SAIF Introduction In Teitelman v. SAIF, 374 Or 271 (2025), the...
From Schedules to Standards: Florida Supreme Court Mandates Consideration of Statutory Factors, Authorizes Pre–First Appearance Release, and Permits Bail Reconsideration for Inability to Pay under Amended Rule 3.131

From Schedules to Standards: Florida Supreme Court Mandates Consideration of Statutory Factors, Authorizes Pre–First Appearance Release, and Permits Bail Reconsideration for Inability to Pay under Amended Rule 3.131

Date: Sep 27, 2025
From Schedules to Standards: Florida Supreme Court Mandates Consideration of Statutory Factors, Authorizes Pre–First Appearance Release, and Permits Bail Reconsideration for Inability to Pay under...
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