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

employment-status-of-minors-under-workers& Case Commentaries

Unpublished Clarification: Testimonial Inconsistencies Alone Do Not Trigger a Mental-Competency Inquiry; Adverse Credibility Can Make Country-Conditions Evidence Irrelevant to CAT Relief

Unpublished Clarification: Testimonial Inconsistencies Alone Do Not Trigger a Mental-Competency Inquiry; Adverse Credibility Can Make Country-Conditions Evidence Irrelevant to CAT Relief

Date: Oct 22, 2025
Unpublished Clarification: Testimonial Inconsistencies Alone Do Not Trigger a Mental-Competency Inquiry; Adverse Credibility Can Make Country-Conditions Evidence Irrelevant to CAT Relief Introduction...
United States v. Simpson: Fourth Circuit Declines to Enforce Appeal Waiver Lacking Consideration; Reaffirms Reliability-Based Sentencing Findings and Temporal-Spatial Nexus for Firearm Enhancements

United States v. Simpson: Fourth Circuit Declines to Enforce Appeal Waiver Lacking Consideration; Reaffirms Reliability-Based Sentencing Findings and Temporal-Spatial Nexus for Firearm Enhancements

Date: Oct 22, 2025
United States v. Simpson: Fourth Circuit Declines to Enforce Appeal Waiver Lacking Consideration; Reaffirms Reliability-Based Sentencing Findings and Temporal-Spatial Nexus for Firearm Enhancements...
Rule 60(b) Appeals Stand Alone: Timeliness, Scope, and Frivolousness in Sullivan v. Graham (10th Cir. 2025)

Rule 60(b) Appeals Stand Alone: Timeliness, Scope, and Frivolousness in Sullivan v. Graham (10th Cir. 2025)

Date: Oct 22, 2025
Rule 60(b) Appeals Stand Alone: Timeliness, Scope, and Frivolousness in Sullivan v. Graham Introduction In Sullivan v. Graham, Nos. 24-3113 & 24-3114 (10th Cir. Oct. 17, 2025), a panel of the U.S....
Tenth Circuit Reaffirms the Narrow Scope of Rule 60(b) Appeals and Confirms Authority to Dismiss Timely Appeals as Frivolous

Tenth Circuit Reaffirms the Narrow Scope of Rule 60(b) Appeals and Confirms Authority to Dismiss Timely Appeals as Frivolous

Date: Oct 22, 2025
Tenth Circuit Reaffirms the Narrow Scope of Rule 60(b) Appeals and Confirms Authority to Dismiss Timely Appeals as Frivolous Introduction In Sullivan v. Hartford Financial Services Group,...
EDTPA Immunity Is Immunity from Liability, Not Suit—No Immediate Appeal Under N.C.G.S. § 1‑277(a) or (b)

EDTPA Immunity Is Immunity from Liability, Not Suit—No Immediate Appeal Under N.C.G.S. § 1‑277(a) or (b)

Date: Oct 22, 2025
EDTPA Immunity Is Immunity from Liability, Not Suit—No Immediate Appeal Under N.C.G.S. § 1‑277(a) or (b) Introduction In Land v. Whitley (Supreme Court of North Carolina, Oct. 17, 2025), the Court...
Unforeseeable Chains of Events and Generalized Warnings Do Not Establish Proximate Cause: Long v. Fowler (N.C. 2025)

Unforeseeable Chains of Events and Generalized Warnings Do Not Establish Proximate Cause: Long v. Fowler (N.C. 2025)

Date: Oct 22, 2025
Unforeseeable Chains of Events and Generalized Warnings Do Not Establish Proximate Cause: Long v. Fowler (N.C. 2025) Introduction In Long v. Fowler, the Supreme Court of North Carolina affirmed...
Mauck v. Cherry Oil Co.: Put/Call Shareholder Agreements Can Defeat Meiselman Dissolution Absent Pleaded “Reasonable Necessity” Under N.C.G.S. § 55-14-30(2)(ii)

Mauck v. Cherry Oil Co.: Put/Call Shareholder Agreements Can Defeat Meiselman Dissolution Absent Pleaded “Reasonable Necessity” Under N.C.G.S. § 55-14-30(2)(ii)

Date: Oct 22, 2025
Mauck v. Cherry Oil Co.: Put/Call Shareholder Agreements Can Defeat Meiselman Dissolution Absent Pleaded “Reasonable Necessity” Under N.C.G.S. § 55-14-30(2)(ii) Introduction This North Carolina...
No Binding Agency Deference in North Carolina: Mitchell mandates de novo review of state administrative regulations

No Binding Agency Deference in North Carolina: Mitchell mandates de novo review of state administrative regulations

Date: Oct 22, 2025
No Binding Agency Deference in North Carolina: Mitchell v. UNC Board of Governors mandates de novo review of state administrative regulations Introduction In Mitchell v. University of North Carolina...
General Permit Conditions That Function as Regulations Are “Rules”: North Carolina Supreme Court Requires APA Rulemaking for Broad Animal‑Waste Permit Conditions

General Permit Conditions That Function as Regulations Are “Rules”: North Carolina Supreme Court Requires APA Rulemaking for Broad Animal‑Waste Permit Conditions

Date: Oct 22, 2025
General Permit Conditions That Function as Regulations Are “Rules”: The North Carolina Supreme Court Requires APA Rulemaking for Broad Animal‑Waste Permit Conditions Case: N.C. Dep't of Env't...
Reviewing the ALJ, Not the Agency, and Recognizing “But-For” Prejudice in Two‑Applicant CON Contests: The North Carolina Supreme Court’s Decision in Pinnacle Health Services v. NCDHHS

Reviewing the ALJ, Not the Agency, and Recognizing “But-For” Prejudice in Two‑Applicant CON Contests: The North Carolina Supreme Court’s Decision in Pinnacle Health Services v. NCDHHS

Date: Oct 22, 2025
Reviewing the ALJ, Not the Agency, and Recognizing “But-For” Prejudice in Two‑Applicant CON Contests Pinnacle Health Services of N.C., LLC v. N.C. Department of Health & Human Services (N.C. Oct. 17,...
State v. Chemuti: Superior-Court Petition Is the Exclusive Path to Obtain Law‑Enforcement Recordings Under N.C.G.S. § 132‑1.4A

State v. Chemuti: Superior-Court Petition Is the Exclusive Path to Obtain Law‑Enforcement Recordings Under N.C.G.S. § 132‑1.4A

Date: Oct 22, 2025
State v. Chemuti: Superior-Court Petition Is the Exclusive Path to Obtain Law‑Enforcement Recordings Under N.C.G.S. § 132‑1.4A Introduction In State v. Chemuti (Supreme Court of North Carolina, Oct....
State v. Lail (N.C. 2025): Misstating the Rule 403 Standard Constitutes Abuse of Discretion; Plain Error Review Does Not Reach Discretionary Evidentiary Rulings

State v. Lail (N.C. 2025): Misstating the Rule 403 Standard Constitutes Abuse of Discretion; Plain Error Review Does Not Reach Discretionary Evidentiary Rulings

Date: Oct 22, 2025
State v. Lail (N.C. 2025): Misstating the Rule 403 Standard Constitutes Abuse of Discretion; Plain Error Review Does Not Reach Discretionary Evidentiary Rulings Introduction In State v. Lail, the...
State v. Norman: Probable Cause for a Vehicle Search Warrant Can Rest on Distinctive Vehicle Identification and a Fictitious Plate—No Need to Resolve Knock-and-Talk Legality When Tainted Facts Are Excised

State v. Norman: Probable Cause for a Vehicle Search Warrant Can Rest on Distinctive Vehicle Identification and a Fictitious Plate—No Need to Resolve Knock-and-Talk Legality When Tainted Facts Are Excised

Date: Oct 22, 2025
State v. Norman: Probable Cause for a Vehicle Search Warrant Can Rest on Distinctive Vehicle Identification and a Fictitious Plate—No Need to Resolve Knock-and-Talk Legality When Tainted Facts Are...
Rogers Overrules Carter: North Carolina Adopts a State Constitutional Good-Faith Exception and Limits § 15A‑974’s Good-Faith to Statutory (Chapter 15A) Violations

Rogers Overrules Carter: North Carolina Adopts a State Constitutional Good-Faith Exception and Limits § 15A‑974’s Good-Faith to Statutory (Chapter 15A) Violations

Date: Oct 22, 2025
Rogers Overrules Carter: North Carolina Adopts a State Constitutional Good-Faith Exception and Limits § 15A‑974’s Good-Faith to Statutory (Chapter 15A) Violations Introduction In State v. Rogers, the...
Clarifying Batson Mootness in North Carolina: Step One Is Not Moot Absent a Step-Three Ruling

Clarifying Batson Mootness in North Carolina: Step One Is Not Moot Absent a Step-Three Ruling

Date: Oct 22, 2025
Clarifying Batson Mootness in North Carolina: Step One Is Not Moot Absent a Step-Three Ruling Introduction In State v. Wilson, the Supreme Court of North Carolina addressed a recurring procedural...
Clear-Error Review of Hardship Mixed Questions and Strict Ineffective-Assistance Prerequisites in Non-LPR Cancellation: Ramirez Lopez v. Bondi (2d Cir. 2025)

Clear-Error Review of Hardship Mixed Questions and Strict Ineffective-Assistance Prerequisites in Non-LPR Cancellation: Ramirez Lopez v. Bondi (2d Cir. 2025)

Date: Oct 19, 2025
Clear-Error Review of Hardship Mixed Questions and Strict Ineffective-Assistance Prerequisites in Non-LPR Cancellation: Ramirez Lopez v. Bondi (2d Cir. 2025) Introduction In Ramirez Lopez v. Bondi,...
Harmless Diagnostic Mislabeling and Time‑Window Limits on New Evidence in SSA Appeals: Kavanaugh v. Commissioner (11th Cir. 2025)

Harmless Diagnostic Mislabeling and Time‑Window Limits on New Evidence in SSA Appeals: Kavanaugh v. Commissioner (11th Cir. 2025)

Date: Oct 19, 2025
Harmless Diagnostic Mislabeling and Time‑Window Limits on New Evidence in SSA Appeals: Kavanaugh v. Commissioner (11th Cir. 2025) Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit (Non‑Argument...
Comparator Specificity and Discriminatory Purpose: Sixth Circuit Tightens Pleading for Equal Protection and Conspiracy Claims Challenging Urban Redevelopment Enforcement

Comparator Specificity and Discriminatory Purpose: Sixth Circuit Tightens Pleading for Equal Protection and Conspiracy Claims Challenging Urban Redevelopment Enforcement

Date: Oct 19, 2025
Comparator Specificity and Discriminatory Purpose: Sixth Circuit Tightens Pleading for Equal Protection and Conspiracy Claims Challenging Urban Redevelopment Enforcement Introduction In April Norman...
Sixth Circuit: § 1983 Procedural Due Process Claims Accrue No Later Than the Last Denial of Process, and Michigan’s No‑Equitable‑Tolling Regime Applies

Sixth Circuit: § 1983 Procedural Due Process Claims Accrue No Later Than the Last Denial of Process, and Michigan’s No‑Equitable‑Tolling Regime Applies

Date: Oct 19, 2025
Sixth Circuit: § 1983 Procedural Due Process Claims Accrue No Later Than the Last Denial of Process, and Michigan’s No‑Equitable‑Tolling Regime Applies Introduction In Charles Bozzo v. Jennifer...
No Bright-Line “Five-Second Rule”: Sixth Circuit Reaffirms Duty to Reassess; Deadly Force After Threat Is Neutralized Is Clearly Unconstitutional

No Bright-Line “Five-Second Rule”: Sixth Circuit Reaffirms Duty to Reassess; Deadly Force After Threat Is Neutralized Is Clearly Unconstitutional

Date: Oct 19, 2025
No Bright-Line “Five-Second Rule”: Sixth Circuit Reaffirms Duty to Reassess; Deadly Force After Threat Is Neutralized Is Clearly Unconstitutional Introduction In Chelesy Eastep v. City of Nashville,...
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