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

State v. Burrington: Medically Required Functional Restrictions Can Constitute “Protracted Impairment” for Serious Bodily Injury; Self-Defense May Be Asserted While Disputing the Injury Element

State v. Burrington: Medically Required Functional Restrictions Can Constitute “Protracted Impairment” for Serious Bodily Injury; Self-Defense May Be Asserted While Disputing the Injury Element

Date: Oct 22, 2025
State v. Burrington: Medically Required Functional Restrictions Can Constitute “Protracted Impairment” for Serious Bodily Injury; Self-Defense May Be Asserted While Disputing the Injury Element...
Reaffirming Hinkle: “Reasonable Evidence” Must Show Unconsciousness at the Moment of the Crime to Warrant an Automatism Instruction

Reaffirming Hinkle: “Reasonable Evidence” Must Show Unconsciousness at the Moment of the Crime to Warrant an Automatism Instruction

Date: Oct 22, 2025
Reaffirming Hinkle: “Reasonable Evidence” Must Show Unconsciousness at the Moment of the Crime to Warrant an Automatism Instruction Introduction In State of West Virginia v. Timothy W. (No. 23-518),...
Ordinance Amendments Can Moot Systemic Challenges; Extraordinary Writs Cannot Compel Discretionary Permit Decisions Absent Arbitrary or Capricious Conduct

Ordinance Amendments Can Moot Systemic Challenges; Extraordinary Writs Cannot Compel Discretionary Permit Decisions Absent Arbitrary or Capricious Conduct

Date: Oct 22, 2025
Ordinance Amendments Can Moot Systemic Challenges; Extraordinary Writs Cannot Compel Discretionary Permit Decisions Absent Arbitrary or Capricious Conduct Introduction In Susan Casdorph v. City of...
Burks v. State: No Inherent Prejudice from Co‑Defendants’ Mid‑Voir Dire Guilty Pleas; Post‑Incision Autopsy Photos Admissible; Single Online Comment Insufficient for Change of Venue

Burks v. State: No Inherent Prejudice from Co‑Defendants’ Mid‑Voir Dire Guilty Pleas; Post‑Incision Autopsy Photos Admissible; Single Online Comment Insufficient for Change of Venue

Date: Oct 22, 2025
Burks v. State: No Inherent Prejudice from Co‑Defendants’ Mid‑Voir Dire Guilty Pleas; Post‑Incision Autopsy Photos Admissible; Single Online Comment Insufficient for Change of Venue Introduction In...
No Per Se Miranda Custody for 10-13 Behavioral Health Interviews; Pattern Insanity and Intoxication Instructions Suffice — Gravitt v. State (Ga. 2025)

No Per Se Miranda Custody for 10-13 Behavioral Health Interviews; Pattern Insanity and Intoxication Instructions Suffice — Gravitt v. State (Ga. 2025)

Date: Oct 22, 2025
No Per Se Miranda Custody for 10-13 Behavioral Health Interviews; Pattern Insanity and Intoxication Instructions Suffice Commentary on Gravitt v. State, Supreme Court of Georgia (Decided Oct. 21,...
Strategic Non-Objections and Prison Gang Expertise: Georgia Supreme Court Clarifies Ineffective Assistance and Relevance Standards in Momon v. State

Strategic Non-Objections and Prison Gang Expertise: Georgia Supreme Court Clarifies Ineffective Assistance and Relevance Standards in Momon v. State

Date: Oct 22, 2025
Strategic Non-Objections and Prison Gang Expertise: Georgia Supreme Court Clarifies Ineffective Assistance and Relevance Standards in Momon v. State Introduction In Momon v. State, the Supreme Court...
Reid v. State: Perceived Rival-Gang Status Can Establish Motive; “Slight” Independent Evidence—Including Surveillance and Gang-Expert Testimony—Suffices to Corroborate Accomplice Testimony

Reid v. State: Perceived Rival-Gang Status Can Establish Motive; “Slight” Independent Evidence—Including Surveillance and Gang-Expert Testimony—Suffices to Corroborate Accomplice Testimony

Date: Oct 22, 2025
Reid v. State: Perceived Rival-Gang Status Can Establish Motive; “Slight” Independent Evidence—Including Surveillance and Gang-Expert Testimony—Suffices to Corroborate Accomplice Testimony...
Smith v. State: Georgia Supreme Court Reaffirms Harmless-Error Review for Minimally Used, Potentially Prejudicial Evidence

Smith v. State: Georgia Supreme Court Reaffirms Harmless-Error Review for Minimally Used, Potentially Prejudicial Evidence

Date: Oct 22, 2025
Smith v. State: Georgia Supreme Court Reaffirms Harmless-Error Review for Minimally Used, Potentially Prejudicial Evidence Introduction In Smith v. State, decided October 21, 2025, the Supreme Court...
Paragraph V(b)(2) Naming Defects Are Non‑Jurisdictional and Curable via OCGA § 9‑11‑21: Tussahaw Reserves, LLC v. Butts County

Paragraph V(b)(2) Naming Defects Are Non‑Jurisdictional and Curable via OCGA § 9‑11‑21: Tussahaw Reserves, LLC v. Butts County

Date: Oct 22, 2025
Paragraph V(b)(2) Naming Defects Are Non‑Jurisdictional and Curable via OCGA § 9‑11‑21: Tussahaw Reserves, LLC v. Butts County Introduction In Tussahaw Reserves, LLC et al. v. Butts County (Supreme...
Ambiguous Surveillance Video and Storewide Spill Evidence at Summary Judgment: Eleventh Circuit Reverses in Van Dorsten v. Wal‑Mart and Clarifies Florida’s § 768.0755 Constructive-Knowledge Pathways

Ambiguous Surveillance Video and Storewide Spill Evidence at Summary Judgment: Eleventh Circuit Reverses in Van Dorsten v. Wal‑Mart and Clarifies Florida’s § 768.0755 Constructive-Knowledge Pathways

Date: Oct 22, 2025
Ambiguous Surveillance Video and Storewide Spill Evidence at Summary Judgment: Eleventh Circuit Reverses in Van Dorsten v. Wal‑Mart and Clarifies Florida’s § 768.0755 Constructive-Knowledge Pathways...
Generic Objections Don’t Preserve §3553(c)(2) Challenges; Omission of a Written Statement of Reasons Is Plain but Harmless When Oral Reasons Are Clear — United States v. Alexander (11th Cir. 2025)

Generic Objections Don’t Preserve §3553(c)(2) Challenges; Omission of a Written Statement of Reasons Is Plain but Harmless When Oral Reasons Are Clear — United States v. Alexander (11th Cir. 2025)

Date: Oct 22, 2025
Generic Objections Don’t Preserve §3553(c)(2) Challenges; Omission of a Written Statement of Reasons Is Plain but Harmless When Oral Reasons Are Clear — United States v. Alexander (11th Cir. 2025)...
Attempted Solicitation Suffices and NPS Jurisdiction Reaches Private Parcels Within Park Boundaries

Attempted Solicitation Suffices and NPS Jurisdiction Reaches Private Parcels Within Park Boundaries

Date: Oct 22, 2025
Attempted Solicitation Suffices and NPS Jurisdiction Reaches Private Parcels Within Park Boundaries Case: United States v. Rady Williams, Nos. 24-14167 & 24-14168 (11th Cir. Oct. 21, 2025) (per...
No Sale Required, No Private Enclave: Eleventh Circuit Clarifies NPS Solicitation and Interference Rules within Park Boundaries

No Sale Required, No Private Enclave: Eleventh Circuit Clarifies NPS Solicitation and Interference Rules within Park Boundaries

Date: Oct 22, 2025
No Sale Required, No Private Enclave: Eleventh Circuit Clarifies NPS Solicitation and Interference Rules within Park Boundaries Case: United States v. Rady Williams, Nos. 24-14167 & 24-14168 (11th...
(Nonprecedential) Second Circuit Clarifies That Home Health Care Benefits Require Either a Licensed Agency or a Certified/Licensed Aide: Jackling v. Brighthouse Life Insurance Co.

(Nonprecedential) Second Circuit Clarifies That Home Health Care Benefits Require Either a Licensed Agency or a Certified/Licensed Aide: Jackling v. Brighthouse Life Insurance Co.

Date: Oct 22, 2025
(Nonprecedential) Second Circuit Clarifies That Home Health Care Benefits Require Either a Licensed Agency or a Certified/Licensed Aide: Jackling v. Brighthouse Life Insurance Co. Introduction In an...
Express Incorporation of “Standard Conditions 1–12” Satisfies Maiorana; Delegation of Treatment Details and Third‑Party Search Notifications Upheld

Express Incorporation of “Standard Conditions 1–12” Satisfies Maiorana; Delegation of Treatment Details and Third‑Party Search Notifications Upheld

Date: Oct 22, 2025
Express Incorporation of “Standard Conditions 1–12” Satisfies Maiorana; Delegation of Treatment Details and Third‑Party Search Notifications Upheld Introduction In United States v. Randolph, No....
Eleventh Circuit Endorses Corps’ Use of Letters of Permission as NEPA Categorical Exclusions—even in a National Seashore—and Declines Size-Based Limits via Ejusdem Generis

Eleventh Circuit Endorses Corps’ Use of Letters of Permission as NEPA Categorical Exclusions—even in a National Seashore—and Declines Size-Based Limits via Ejusdem Generis

Date: Oct 22, 2025
Eleventh Circuit Endorses Corps’ Use of Letters of Permission as NEPA Categorical Exclusions—even in a National Seashore—and Declines Size-Based Limits via Ejusdem Generis Introduction In Center for...
Eleventh Circuit Clarifies: Misusing the Class‑of‑One Comparator Standard Can Render a Civil Rights Claim “Frivolous,” Justifying § 1988 Defense‑Side Fees

Eleventh Circuit Clarifies: Misusing the Class‑of‑One Comparator Standard Can Render a Civil Rights Claim “Frivolous,” Justifying § 1988 Defense‑Side Fees

Date: Oct 22, 2025
Eleventh Circuit Clarifies: Misusing the Class‑of‑One Comparator Standard Can Render a Civil Rights Claim “Frivolous,” Justifying § 1988 Defense‑Side Fees Introduction In Hybrid Pharma LLC v. Matthew...
Substantial Truth, Opinion on Intent, and the “Of-and-Concerning” Gatekeeper: Eleventh Circuit Affirms Dismissal in Pick v. Raffensperger and Defers to Local Divisional Venue Rules

Substantial Truth, Opinion on Intent, and the “Of-and-Concerning” Gatekeeper: Eleventh Circuit Affirms Dismissal in Pick v. Raffensperger and Defers to Local Divisional Venue Rules

Date: Oct 22, 2025
Substantial Truth, Opinion on Intent, and the “Of-and-Concerning” Gatekeeper: Eleventh Circuit Affirms Dismissal in Pick v. Raffensperger and Defers to Local Divisional Venue Rules Introduction In...
Rule 68 Offers Can Contractually Cut Off § 1988 “Fees-on-Fees,” and Across-the-Board Lodestar Reductions Must Be Principled: Commentary on Otto v. City of Boca Raton (11th Cir. 2025)

Rule 68 Offers Can Contractually Cut Off § 1988 “Fees-on-Fees,” and Across-the-Board Lodestar Reductions Must Be Principled: Commentary on Otto v. City of Boca Raton (11th Cir. 2025)

Date: Oct 22, 2025
Rule 68 Offers Can Contractually Cut Off § 1988 “Fees-on-Fees,” and Across-the-Board Lodestar Reductions Must Be Principled: Commentary on Otto v. City of Boca Raton (11th Cir. 2025) Introduction...
Purity Irrelevant to § 841(b)(1)(B) Mandatory Minimums; “Standard” Supervised-Release Conditions May Be Imposed by Reference — United States v. King (11th Cir. 2025)

Purity Irrelevant to § 841(b)(1)(B) Mandatory Minimums; “Standard” Supervised-Release Conditions May Be Imposed by Reference — United States v. King (11th Cir. 2025)

Date: Oct 22, 2025
PURITY IRRELEVANT TO § 841(b)(1)(B) MANDATORY MINIMUMS; “STANDARD” SUPERVISED-RELEASE CONDITIONS MAY BE IMPOSED BY REFERENCE United States v. Adam Joseph King, No. 24-12265 (11th Cir. Oct. 20, 2025)...
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