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

ensuring-indictment-validity:-prosecutor& Case Commentaries

Breach of Contract as Concrete Injury and Classwide Challenges to “Negotiation” Adjustments: Sixth Circuit Affirms Certification in Clippinger v. State Farm

Breach of Contract as Concrete Injury and Classwide Challenges to “Negotiation” Adjustments: Sixth Circuit Affirms Certification in Clippinger v. State Farm

Date: Oct 11, 2025
Breach of Contract as Concrete Injury and Classwide Challenges to “Negotiation” Adjustments: Sixth Circuit Affirms Certification in Clippinger v. State Farm Introduction This published decision from...
Habeas Courts Retain Jurisdiction to Sanction Pre‑Compliance Violations of Conditional and Unconditional Writs, Even After Belated State Compliance; “Penalty Bar” Reserved for Substantial Inequitable Conduct

Habeas Courts Retain Jurisdiction to Sanction Pre‑Compliance Violations of Conditional and Unconditional Writs, Even After Belated State Compliance; “Penalty Bar” Reserved for Substantial Inequitable Conduct

Date: Oct 11, 2025
Habeas Courts Retain Jurisdiction to Sanction Pre‑Compliance Violations of Conditional and Unconditional Writs, Even After Belated State Compliance; “Penalty Bar” Reserved for Substantial Inequitable...
United States v. Riley: Pro se allegations that counsel entered a sentencing stipulation without client consent trigger a mandatory judicial inquiry; the hybrid-representation bar does not apply

United States v. Riley: Pro se allegations that counsel entered a sentencing stipulation without client consent trigger a mandatory judicial inquiry; the hybrid-representation bar does not apply

Date: Oct 11, 2025
United States v. Riley: Pro se allegations that counsel entered a sentencing stipulation without client consent trigger a mandatory judicial inquiry; the hybrid-representation bar does not apply...
Frericks v. Department of the Navy: Tenth Circuit Clarifies that Motive and Timing May Inform “Reasonable Belief” Under the WPA and Endorses Disclosure-by-Disclosure Contributing-Factor Analysis

Frericks v. Department of the Navy: Tenth Circuit Clarifies that Motive and Timing May Inform “Reasonable Belief” Under the WPA and Endorses Disclosure-by-Disclosure Contributing-Factor Analysis

Date: Oct 11, 2025
Frericks v. Department of the Navy: Tenth Circuit Clarifies that Motive and Timing May Inform “Reasonable Belief” Under the WPA and Endorses Disclosure-by-Disclosure Contributing-Factor Analysis...
Tenth Circuit rejects categorical “hub” placements: Individualized placement determinations are required under IDEA, ADA, and Section 504; futility excuses Section 504 exhaustion when hearing officers lack jurisdiction

Tenth Circuit rejects categorical “hub” placements: Individualized placement determinations are required under IDEA, ADA, and Section 504; futility excuses Section 504 exhaustion when hearing officers lack jurisdiction

Date: Oct 11, 2025
Tenth Circuit rejects categorical “hub” placements: Individualized placement determinations are required under IDEA, ADA, and Section 504; futility excuses Section 504 exhaustion when hearing...
Unexplained VE Skill Labels Won’t Do: Tenth Circuit Requires Record Documentation of Transferable Skills Under SSR 82-41

Unexplained VE Skill Labels Won’t Do: Tenth Circuit Requires Record Documentation of Transferable Skills Under SSR 82-41

Date: Oct 11, 2025
Unexplained VE Skill Labels Won’t Do: Tenth Circuit Requires Record Documentation of Transferable Skills Under SSR 82-41 Introduction This commentary analyzes the Tenth Circuit’s unpublished order...
Tenth Circuit Clarifies: Mental-Health Progress Notes Without Functional Assessments Are Not “Medical Opinions” Under SSA’s Post-2017 Regulations

Tenth Circuit Clarifies: Mental-Health Progress Notes Without Functional Assessments Are Not “Medical Opinions” Under SSA’s Post-2017 Regulations

Date: Oct 11, 2025
Tenth Circuit Clarifies: Mental-Health Progress Notes Without Functional Assessments Are Not “Medical Opinions” Under SSA’s Post-2017 Regulations Introduction In Parsons v. Commissioner, SSA (10th...
Pre‑Enforcement Standing Demands a Proscribing Law: Tenth Circuit Rejects HCSM Challenge Based on New Mexico’s Insurance Definition

Pre‑Enforcement Standing Demands a Proscribing Law: Tenth Circuit Rejects HCSM Challenge Based on New Mexico’s Insurance Definition

Date: Oct 11, 2025
Pre‑Enforcement Standing Demands a Proscribing Law: Tenth Circuit Rejects HCSM Challenge Based on New Mexico’s Insurance Definition Introduction In Samaritan Ministries International v. Kane, No....
No State Action in Private Condemnation: Tenth Circuit Holds Private Landowners Using Oklahoma’s “Private Way of Necessity” Statutes Are Not § 1983 Actors

No State Action in Private Condemnation: Tenth Circuit Holds Private Landowners Using Oklahoma’s “Private Way of Necessity” Statutes Are Not § 1983 Actors

Date: Oct 11, 2025
No State Action in Private Condemnation: Tenth Circuit Holds Private Landowners Using Oklahoma’s “Private Way of Necessity” Statutes Are Not § 1983 Actors Introduction In Witherspoon v. Ince, the...
Acknowledgment-of-Receipt Not Required: Corroborated Sworn Statements Can Defeat Summary Judgment on PLRA Exhaustion, and District Courts Must Assess Perttu’s Jury-Trial Mandate Before Holding a Pavey Hearing

Acknowledgment-of-Receipt Not Required: Corroborated Sworn Statements Can Defeat Summary Judgment on PLRA Exhaustion, and District Courts Must Assess Perttu’s Jury-Trial Mandate Before Holding a Pavey Hearing

Date: Oct 11, 2025
Acknowledgment-of-Receipt Not Required: Corroborated Sworn Statements Can Defeat Summary Judgment on PLRA Exhaustion, and District Courts Must Assess Perttu’s Jury-Trial Mandate Before Holding a...
No § 4204 Carve-Out in § 4219 Installment Calculations: Seventh Circuit Clarifies That “the highest” Means the Highest

No § 4204 Carve-Out in § 4219 Installment Calculations: Seventh Circuit Clarifies That “the highest” Means the Highest

Date: Oct 11, 2025
No § 4204 Carve-Out in § 4219 Installment Calculations: Seventh Circuit Clarifies That “the highest” Means the Highest Case: SuperValu, Inc. v. United Food and Commercial Workers Unions and Employers...
Hoff (2025 ND 164): Conclusory Crane Findings Are Insufficient—District Courts Must Articulate a Specific, Evidence-Based Nexus Between Disorder and Inability to Control

Hoff (2025 ND 164): Conclusory Crane Findings Are Insufficient—District Courts Must Articulate a Specific, Evidence-Based Nexus Between Disorder and Inability to Control

Date: Oct 10, 2025
Hoff (2025 ND 164): Conclusory Crane Findings Are Insufficient—District Courts Must Articulate a Specific, Evidence-Based Nexus Between Disorder and Inability to Control Introduction This North...
Waived Jury-Instruction Challenges Define the Elements for Sufficiency Review: State v. Guthmiller (2025 ND 162)

Waived Jury-Instruction Challenges Define the Elements for Sufficiency Review: State v. Guthmiller (2025 ND 162)

Date: Oct 10, 2025
Waived Jury-Instruction Challenges Define the Elements for Sufficiency Review: State v. Guthmiller (2025 ND 162) Introduction In State v. Guthmiller, 2025 ND 162, the North Dakota Supreme Court...
Remote Child Testimony Permissible Upon Presence‑Specific Trauma Impairing Communication: Commentary on State v. Moen, 2025 ND 163

Remote Child Testimony Permissible Upon Presence‑Specific Trauma Impairing Communication: Commentary on State v. Moen, 2025 ND 163

Date: Oct 10, 2025
Remote Child Testimony Permissible Upon Presence‑Specific Trauma Impairing Communication: State v. Moen, 2025 ND 163 Introduction In State v. Moen, 2025 ND 163, the North Dakota Supreme Court...
First Department Clarifies: Cooperative Boards Are Not Suable Entities in New York

First Department Clarifies: Cooperative Boards Are Not Suable Entities in New York

Date: Oct 10, 2025
First Department Clarifies: Cooperative Boards Are Not Suable Entities in New York Introduction In Tahari v. 860 Fifth Avenue Corporation (2025 NY Slip Op 05584), the Appellate Division, First...
Herrera v. Tempo Carpentry LLC: Strict Waiver of Absent Witnesses in Expedited Workers’ Compensation Hearings Without a Specific Good-Cause Showing

Herrera v. Tempo Carpentry LLC: Strict Waiver of Absent Witnesses in Expedited Workers’ Compensation Hearings Without a Specific Good-Cause Showing

Date: Oct 10, 2025
Herrera v. Tempo Carpentry LLC: Strict Waiver of Absent Witnesses in Expedited Workers’ Compensation Hearings Without a Specific Good-Cause Showing Introduction In Matter of Herrera v. Tempo...
Spada v. Keeler Construction: Causation for Occupational Hearing Loss Must Be Anchored in Audiometric Pattern and Address Alternative Noise Exposures

Spada v. Keeler Construction: Causation for Occupational Hearing Loss Must Be Anchored in Audiometric Pattern and Address Alternative Noise Exposures

Date: Oct 10, 2025
Spada v. Keeler Construction: Causation for Occupational Hearing Loss Must Be Anchored in Audiometric Pattern and Address Alternative Noise Exposures Court: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court,...
Plea “Satisfaction” Clauses Require Defendant to Prove the Predicate Burglary; No Sua Sponte DVSJA Hearing Absent Request — Commentary on People v. Tenace

Plea “Satisfaction” Clauses Require Defendant to Prove the Predicate Burglary; No Sua Sponte DVSJA Hearing Absent Request — Commentary on People v. Tenace

Date: Oct 10, 2025
Plea “Satisfaction” Clauses Require Defendant to Prove the Predicate Burglary; No Sua Sponte DVSJA Hearing Absent Request Commentary on People v. Tenace, 2025 NY Slip Op 05552 (App Div 3d Dept Oct....
No Immovable Property Exception: Washington Supreme Court Bars Adverse Possession Suits Against Tribes’ Off‑Reservation Lands Absent Congressional Abrogation or Tribal Waiver

No Immovable Property Exception: Washington Supreme Court Bars Adverse Possession Suits Against Tribes’ Off‑Reservation Lands Absent Congressional Abrogation or Tribal Waiver

Date: Oct 10, 2025
No Immovable Property Exception: Washington Supreme Court Bars Adverse Possession Suits Against Tribes’ Off‑Reservation Lands Absent Congressional Abrogation or Tribal Waiver Introduction In Flying T...
Divisional Conflict and Prompt Diligence as “Extraordinary Circumstances”: Washington Supreme Court Clarifies CR 60(b)(11) Relief for Legal Errors

Divisional Conflict and Prompt Diligence as “Extraordinary Circumstances”: Washington Supreme Court Clarifies CR 60(b)(11) Relief for Legal Errors

Date: Oct 10, 2025
Divisional Conflict and Prompt Diligence as “Extraordinary Circumstances”: Washington Supreme Court Clarifies CR 60(b)(11) Relief for Legal Errors Introduction In Luv v. West Coast Servicing, Inc....
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