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

comprehensive-interpretation-of-& Case Commentaries

Refining the RLUIPA Substantial-Burden Threshold and Establishment-Clause Neutrality in Prison: A Commentary on Lumsden v. Collier (5th Cir. 2025)

Refining the RLUIPA Substantial-Burden Threshold and Establishment-Clause Neutrality in Prison: A Commentary on Lumsden v. Collier (5th Cir. 2025)

Date: Aug 25, 2025
Refining the RLUIPA Substantial-Burden Threshold and Establishment-Clause Neutrality in Prison: A Commentary on Lumsden v. Collier (5th Cir. 2025) Introduction In Lumsden v. Collier, No. 24-50605...
Fifth Circuit Declares §1503(a) Limitation Non-Jurisdictional & Allows Timely Motions to Reopen to Reset the Clock – Commentary on Sarabia v. Noem (2025)

Fifth Circuit Declares §1503(a) Limitation Non-Jurisdictional & Allows Timely Motions to Reopen to Reset the Clock – Commentary on Sarabia v. Noem (2025)

Date: Aug 25, 2025
Fifth Circuit Declares §1503(a) Limitation Non-Jurisdictional & Allows Timely Motions to Reopen to Reset the Clock Commentary on Sarabia v. Noem, No. 24-50750 (5th Cir. Aug. 22, 2025) 1. Introduction...
Rejecting Per-Se Indispensability: Sixth Circuit Clarifies Rule 19 in Estate of William Plott v. HHS

Rejecting Per-Se Indispensability: Sixth Circuit Clarifies Rule 19 in Estate of William Plott v. HHS

Date: Aug 25, 2025
Rejecting Per-Se Indispensability: Sixth Circuit Clarifies Rule 19 in Estate of William Plott v. Department of Health & Human Services 1. Introduction The Sixth Circuit’s published decision in Estate...

        “Equal-Impact, No Violation” – Sixth Circuit Clarifies the Causation Threshold
        for ADA Title II Claims Arising from Alterations to Public Facilities

“Equal-Impact, No Violation” – Sixth Circuit Clarifies the Causation Threshold for ADA Title II Claims Arising from Alterations to Public Facilities

Date: Aug 25, 2025
“Equal-Impact, No Violation” – Sixth Circuit Clarifies the Causation Threshold for ADA Title II Claims Arising from Alterations to Public Facilities 1. Introduction In John Reinhart v. City of...
Harris Stops at the Curb: Sixth Circuit Confirms that Challenges to Drug-Dog Reliability in Warrant Cases Proceed Under Franks, Not Harris

Harris Stops at the Curb: Sixth Circuit Confirms that Challenges to Drug-Dog Reliability in Warrant Cases Proceed Under Franks, Not Harris

Date: Aug 25, 2025
Harris Stops at the Curb: Sixth Circuit Confirms that Challenges to Drug-Dog Reliability in Warrant Cases Proceed Under Franks, Not Harris Introduction United States v. Jaavaid Alan McCarley-Connin,...
Ellis v. Yasenchack (2025): Sixth Circuit Reinforces the “Concession-of-Facts” Rule in Qualified Immunity Interlocutory Appeals

Ellis v. Yasenchack (2025): Sixth Circuit Reinforces the “Concession-of-Facts” Rule in Qualified Immunity Interlocutory Appeals

Date: Aug 25, 2025
Ellis v. Yasenchack (6th Cir. 2025): Sixth Circuit Reinforces the “Concession-of-Facts” Rule in Qualified Immunity Interlocutory Appeals Introduction William Ellis, a Cleveland resident, brought a §...
Krueger v. Phillips (10th Cir. 2025): Definitive Liability for Prolonged Prone Restraints and the Expanded Duty to Intervene

Krueger v. Phillips (10th Cir. 2025): Definitive Liability for Prolonged Prone Restraints and the Expanded Duty to Intervene

Date: Aug 25, 2025
Krueger v. Phillips (10th Cir. 2025): Definitive Liability for Prolonged Prone Restraints and the Expanded Duty to Intervene Introduction The United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, in...
Commentary: United States v. Amir Golestan & Micfo, LLC – IP Addresses as “Property,” Ciminelli’s Limits, and the Scope of Rule 11 Immigration Warnings

Commentary: United States v. Amir Golestan & Micfo, LLC – IP Addresses as “Property,” Ciminelli’s Limits, and the Scope of Rule 11 Immigration Warnings

Date: Aug 25, 2025
United States v. Amir Golestan & Micfo, LLC – IP Addresses as “Property,” Ciminelli’s Limits, and the Scope of Rule 11 Immigration Warnings Introduction United States v. Golestan is the Fourth...
“No Constructive Conditional Plea”: The Fourth Circuit’s Clarification on Appellate Rights and Rogers Consistency in United States v. Kyrie Thompson

“No Constructive Conditional Plea”: The Fourth Circuit’s Clarification on Appellate Rights and Rogers Consistency in United States v. Kyrie Thompson

Date: Aug 25, 2025
“No Constructive Conditional Plea”: The Fourth Circuit’s Clarification on Appellate Rights and Rogers Consistency in United States v. Kyrie Thompson Introduction In United States v. Kyrie Thompson,...
Fourth Circuit Clarifies That IPv4 Addresses Are “Property” Under the Federal Fraud Statutes and Sets Harmless-Error Standard for Rule 11 Immigration Warnings to Naturalized Citizens

Fourth Circuit Clarifies That IPv4 Addresses Are “Property” Under the Federal Fraud Statutes and Sets Harmless-Error Standard for Rule 11 Immigration Warnings to Naturalized Citizens

Date: Aug 25, 2025
Fourth Circuit Clarifies That IPv4 Addresses Are “Property” Under the Federal Fraud Statutes and Sets Harmless-Error Standard for Rule 11 Immigration Warnings to Naturalized Citizens Introduction...
Krueger v. Crockett (2025): The Tenth Circuit’s Definitive Stance on Prolonged Prone Restraints, Post-Restraint Tasers, and Universal Duty to Intervene

Krueger v. Crockett (2025): The Tenth Circuit’s Definitive Stance on Prolonged Prone Restraints, Post-Restraint Tasers, and Universal Duty to Intervene

Date: Aug 25, 2025
Krueger v. Crockett (10th Cir. 2025): Prolonged Prone Restraints, Post-Restraint Tasers, and the Expansive Duty to Intervene Introduction In Krueger v. Crockett, the United States Court of Appeals...
“No Officer May Ignore the Danger”: Krueger v. Orr and the Tenth Circuit’s Firm Ban on Prolonged Prone Restraints and Failure-to-Intervene

“No Officer May Ignore the Danger”: Krueger v. Orr and the Tenth Circuit’s Firm Ban on Prolonged Prone Restraints and Failure-to-Intervene

Date: Aug 25, 2025
“No Officer May Ignore the Danger”: Krueger v. Orr and the Tenth Circuit’s Firm Ban on Prolonged Prone Restraints and Failure-to-Intervene Introduction In Krueger v. Orr, ___ F.4th ___ (10th Cir....
Tenth Circuit Clarifies Officer Liability for Prolonged Prone Restraints and Failure-to-Intervene – A Commentary on Krueger v. Phillips

Tenth Circuit Clarifies Officer Liability for Prolonged Prone Restraints and Failure-to-Intervene – A Commentary on Krueger v. Phillips

Date: Aug 25, 2025
Tenth Circuit Clarifies Officer Liability for Prolonged Prone Restraints and Failure-to-Intervene Commentary on Krueger v. Phillips, ___ F.4th ___ (10th Cir. Aug. 22 2025) 1. Introduction Krueger v....
“Notwithstanding” Does Not Trump the Default Sourcing Rule:  Liberty Global v. Commissioner and the Limits of I.R.C. § 904(f)(3)

“Notwithstanding” Does Not Trump the Default Sourcing Rule: Liberty Global v. Commissioner and the Limits of I.R.C. § 904(f)(3)

Date: Aug 25, 2025
“Notwithstanding” Does Not Trump the Default Sourcing Rule: Liberty Global v. Commissioner and the Limits of I.R.C. § 904(f)(3) Introduction In Liberty Global, Inc. v. Commissioner of Internal...
“No Presumptive Incompetence”:  Martinez v. Martinez and the Evidentiary Threshold for Competency-Based §2254 Claims

“No Presumptive Incompetence”: Martinez v. Martinez and the Evidentiary Threshold for Competency-Based §2254 Claims

Date: Aug 25, 2025
“No Presumptive Incompetence”: Martinez v. Martinez and the Evidentiary Threshold for Competency-Based §2254 Claims Introduction Martinez v. Martinez, No. 24-2105 (10th Cir. Aug. 22, 2025), is a...
Conflicts, Collateral Orders, and Screening: The Supreme Court Clarifies When Prosecutorial Conflicts Disqualify the Office of the Attorney General

Conflicts, Collateral Orders, and Screening: The Supreme Court Clarifies When Prosecutorial Conflicts Disqualify the Office of the Attorney General

Date: Aug 25, 2025
Conflicts, Collateral Orders, and Screening: The Supreme Court Clarifies When Prosecutorial Conflicts Disqualify the Office of the Attorney General Introduction Case: Commonwealth v. Torres (2025 MP...
Due-Process Notice to Corporate Landowners and the Finality of Decertified Irrigated Acres: A Commentary on State ex rel. Seeman v. Lower Republican NRD, 319 Neb. 681 (2025)

Due-Process Notice to Corporate Landowners and the Finality of Decertified Irrigated Acres: A Commentary on State ex rel. Seeman v. Lower Republican NRD, 319 Neb. 681 (2025)

Date: Aug 25, 2025
Due-Process Notice to Corporate Landowners and the Finality of Decertified Irrigated Acres: A Commentary on State ex rel. Seeman v. Lower Republican NRD, 319 Neb. 681 (2025) 1. Introduction The...
“No-Offset” Rule for Significantly Excessive Earnings:  Supreme Court of Ohio Clarifies R.C. 4928.143(F)

“No-Offset” Rule for Significantly Excessive Earnings: Supreme Court of Ohio Clarifies R.C. 4928.143(F)

Date: Aug 25, 2025
“No-Offset” Rule for Significantly Excessive Earnings In re Application of Dayton Power & Light Co. (2025-Ohio-2953) Introduction The Supreme Court of Ohio, in In re Application of Dayton Power &...
Therapeutic Suspension of Visitation as a “Reasonable Effort” in Alaska CINA Cases: Commentary on Kash B. v. State of Alaska, DFCS, OCS (2025)

Therapeutic Suspension of Visitation as a “Reasonable Effort” in Alaska CINA Cases: Commentary on Kash B. v. State of Alaska, DFCS, OCS (2025)

Date: Aug 25, 2025
Therapeutic Suspension of Visitation as a “Reasonable Effort” in Alaska CINA Cases Commentary on Kash B. (Father) v. State of Alaska, Department of Family and Community Services, Office of Children’s...
The Invited-Error Bar to Mid-Litigation Shifts in Contract-Damages Theories: 
            Commentary on D&M Roofing & Siding v. Distribution, Inc., 319 Neb. 707 (2025)

The Invited-Error Bar to Mid-Litigation Shifts in Contract-Damages Theories: Commentary on D&M Roofing & Siding v. Distribution, Inc., 319 Neb. 707 (2025)

Date: Aug 25, 2025
The Invited-Error Bar to Mid-Litigation Shifts in Contract-Damages Theories: Nebraska Supreme Court Clarifies Party Concessions in D&M Roofing & Siding v. Distribution, Inc. (319 Neb. 707) 1....
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