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

imputation-of-agent&amp Case Commentaries

No Clearly Established Due Process Right in Inmate Craft‑Sale Proceeds: Fifth Circuit Grants Qualified Immunity in Savage v. Westcott

No Clearly Established Due Process Right in Inmate Craft‑Sale Proceeds: Fifth Circuit Grants Qualified Immunity in Savage v. Westcott

Date: Oct 1, 2025
No Clearly Established Due Process Right in Inmate Craft‑Sale Proceeds: Fifth Circuit Grants Qualified Immunity in Savage v. Westcott Introduction In Savage v. Westcott, the United States Court of...
Tenth Circuit Clarifies that Broad Habitability Exclusions Defeat the Duty to Defend Even When Claims Are Pleaded as Negligence

Tenth Circuit Clarifies that Broad Habitability Exclusions Defeat the Duty to Defend Even When Claims Are Pleaded as Negligence

Date: Oct 1, 2025
Tenth Circuit Clarifies that Broad Habitability Exclusions Defeat the Duty to Defend Even When Claims Are Pleaded as Negligence Case: Atain Specialty Insurance Company v. Eagle's Pointe, LLC, No....
Time-of-Decision Controls Qualifying-Child Status Under § 1229b(b)(1)(D); Post-Loper Bright, No Agency Deference; BIA’s Waiver Determinations Constrained by 8 C.F.R. § 1003.3(b)

Time-of-Decision Controls Qualifying-Child Status Under § 1229b(b)(1)(D); Post-Loper Bright, No Agency Deference; BIA’s Waiver Determinations Constrained by 8 C.F.R. § 1003.3(b)

Date: Oct 1, 2025
Time-of-Decision Controls Qualifying-Child Status Under § 1229b(b)(1)(D); Post-Loper Bright, No Agency Deference; BIA’s Waiver Determinations Constrained by 8 C.F.R. § 1003.3(b) Introduction In...
Failure to Attend Successor Onboarding Is Not an Adverse Action by the Outgoing Employer: The Tenth Circuit’s ADA Baseline in Swepson v. Aimbridge

Failure to Attend Successor Onboarding Is Not an Adverse Action by the Outgoing Employer: The Tenth Circuit’s ADA Baseline in Swepson v. Aimbridge

Date: Oct 1, 2025
Failure to Attend Successor Onboarding Is Not an Adverse Action by the Outgoing Employer: The Tenth Circuit’s ADA Baseline in Swepson v. Aimbridge Introduction In Swepson v. Aimbridge Employee...
Tenth Circuit Confirms Materiality of Form 4473 Indictment Question: § 922(a)(6) Convictions Stand Because § 922(n) Is Facially Constitutional (United States v. Peavler)

Tenth Circuit Confirms Materiality of Form 4473 Indictment Question: § 922(a)(6) Convictions Stand Because § 922(n) Is Facially Constitutional (United States v. Peavler)

Date: Oct 1, 2025
Tenth Circuit Confirms Materiality of Form 4473 Indictment Question: § 922(a)(6) Convictions Stand Because § 922(n) Is Facially Constitutional (United States v. Peavler) Note: This Order and Judgment...
No Right to Nullify Materiality: Tenth Circuit Holds False Denial of Felony Indictment on Form 4473 Is Actionable Because § 922(n) Is Facially Valid

No Right to Nullify Materiality: Tenth Circuit Holds False Denial of Felony Indictment on Form 4473 Is Actionable Because § 922(n) Is Facially Valid

Date: Oct 1, 2025
No Right to Nullify Materiality: Tenth Circuit Holds False Denial of Felony Indictment on Form 4473 Is Actionable Because § 922(n) Is Facially Valid Introduction In United States v. Reilly...
Futility Requires Evidence and CAT Demands Official Acquiescence: Guidance from Masaquiza‑Masaquiza v. Bondi (2d Cir. 2025)

Futility Requires Evidence and CAT Demands Official Acquiescence: Guidance from Masaquiza‑Masaquiza v. Bondi (2d Cir. 2025)

Date: Oct 1, 2025
Futility Requires Evidence and CAT Demands Official Acquiescence: Guidance from Masaquiza‑Masaquiza v. Bondi (2d Cir. 2025) Note: This decision is a Summary Order of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the...
Plain-View Hazards on Icy Roads: Comparative Negligence for the Jury; No Default Spoliation for Pre‑Notice Telematics Loss

Plain-View Hazards on Icy Roads: Comparative Negligence for the Jury; No Default Spoliation for Pre‑Notice Telematics Loss

Date: Oct 1, 2025
Plain-View Hazards on Icy Roads: Comparative Negligence for the Jury; No Default Spoliation for Pre‑Notice Telematics Loss Introduction In Fahrnow v. E-5 Oilfield Services, 2025 MT 220, the Montana...
Noncompliance and Open‑Ended Incarceration: Termination Without Less Restrictive Alternatives and No Post‑Dispositional Improvement Period

Noncompliance and Open‑Ended Incarceration: Termination Without Less Restrictive Alternatives and No Post‑Dispositional Improvement Period

Date: Oct 1, 2025
Noncompliance and Open‑Ended Incarceration: Termination Without Less Restrictive Alternatives and No Post‑Dispositional Improvement Period Case: In re A.F. and H.J., No. 24-574 Court: Supreme Court...
Consent to Guardianship Is Not a Safe Harbor: West Virginia Affirms Termination Where No Reasonable Likelihood of Correction Exists

Consent to Guardianship Is Not a Safe Harbor: West Virginia Affirms Termination Where No Reasonable Likelihood of Correction Exists

Date: Oct 1, 2025
Consent to Guardianship Is Not a Safe Harbor: West Virginia Affirms Termination Where No Reasonable Likelihood of Correction Exists Case: In re A.A., K.A., and A.R., No. 24-474 (W. Va. Sept. 30,...
In re G.J.: Refusal to Engage in Services Justifies Termination Without Less Restrictive Alternatives and Supports Denial of Post‑Termination Visitation

In re G.J.: Refusal to Engage in Services Justifies Termination Without Less Restrictive Alternatives and Supports Denial of Post‑Termination Visitation

Date: Oct 1, 2025
In re G.J.: Refusal to Engage in Services Justifies Termination Without Less Restrictive Alternatives and Supports Denial of Post‑Termination Visitation Introduction In a memorandum decision dated...
In re G.A.: West Virginia High Court Reaffirms Written-Motion Prerequisite for Improvement Periods and Clarifies That Less Restrictive Alternatives Are Not Required When Statutory Termination Criteria Are Met

In re G.A.: West Virginia High Court Reaffirms Written-Motion Prerequisite for Improvement Periods and Clarifies That Less Restrictive Alternatives Are Not Required When Statutory Termination Criteria Are Met

Date: Oct 1, 2025
In re G.A.: Reaffirming the Written-Motion Requirement for Improvement Periods and the Permissibility of Termination Without Less Restrictive Alternatives Introduction In a memorandum decision issued...
Express Findings and Maximization Required to Deviate from West Virginia’s Statutory 50/50 Custody Presumption

Express Findings and Maximization Required to Deviate from West Virginia’s Statutory 50/50 Custody Presumption

Date: Oct 1, 2025
Express Findings and Maximization Required to Deviate from West Virginia’s Statutory 50/50 Custody Presumption Introduction In In re R.L., No. 24-395 (W. Va. Sept. 30, 2025), the Supreme Court of...
Reaffirming Denial of Improvement Periods and Termination Where Parent Fails to Engage: West Virginia High Court’s Memorandum Decision in In re J.H., J.M., T.K., and R.K.

Reaffirming Denial of Improvement Periods and Termination Where Parent Fails to Engage: West Virginia High Court’s Memorandum Decision in In re J.H., J.M., T.K., and R.K.

Date: Oct 1, 2025
Reaffirming Denial of Improvement Periods and Termination Where Parent Fails to Engage: West Virginia High Court’s Memorandum Decision in In re J.H., J.M., T.K., and R.K. Introduction This commentary...
No Automatic New Trial or Retroactive Exclusion When a Count Fails: Clarifying the Effect of a Reversed Street Gang Act Charge on Remaining Convictions

No Automatic New Trial or Retroactive Exclusion When a Count Fails: Clarifying the Effect of a Reversed Street Gang Act Charge on Remaining Convictions

Date: Oct 1, 2025
No Automatic New Trial or Retroactive Exclusion When a Count Fails: Clarifying the Effect of a Reversed Street Gang Act Charge on Remaining Convictions Introduction In Bostic v. The State and Wright...
Reaffirming West Virginia’s 50-50 Custody Presumption: Trial Courts Must Apply § 48-9-102a, Analyze § 48-9-209(f) Factors, Enter Written Findings, and Maximize Parenting Time

Reaffirming West Virginia’s 50-50 Custody Presumption: Trial Courts Must Apply § 48-9-102a, Analyze § 48-9-209(f) Factors, Enter Written Findings, and Maximize Parenting Time

Date: Oct 1, 2025
Reaffirming West Virginia’s 50-50 Custody Presumption: Trial Courts Must Apply § 48-9-102a, Analyze § 48-9-209(f) Factors, Enter Written Findings, and Maximize Parenting Time Case: In re R.L., No....
Reaffirming the Rule 8(a) Presumption and Tightening Limits on Child Confrontation, Discovery, and Sexual-History Evidence in Abuse-and-Neglect Adjudications

Reaffirming the Rule 8(a) Presumption and Tightening Limits on Child Confrontation, Discovery, and Sexual-History Evidence in Abuse-and-Neglect Adjudications

Date: Oct 1, 2025
Reaffirming the Rule 8(a) Presumption and Tightening Limits on Child Confrontation, Discovery, and Sexual-History Evidence in Abuse-and-Neglect Adjudications Introduction In re L.H.-1, B.H., L.H.-2,...
Improvement Period May Be Denied When a Parent’s Promise to a Critical No‑Contact Condition Lacks Credibility, Even Amid Services Compliance

Improvement Period May Be Denied When a Parent’s Promise to a Critical No‑Contact Condition Lacks Credibility, Even Amid Services Compliance

Date: Oct 1, 2025
Improvement Period May Be Denied When a Parent’s Promise to a Critical No‑Contact Condition Lacks Credibility, Even Amid Services Compliance Introduction In In re I.R. and E.B., No. 24-496 (W. Va....
Judicial Notice of a Prior Competency Finding Is Permissible Without Vouching; Strict Timeliness for Rule 37 Appeals Confirmed — Commentary on United States v. Ferrer‑Sosa (1st Cir.)

Judicial Notice of a Prior Competency Finding Is Permissible Without Vouching; Strict Timeliness for Rule 37 Appeals Confirmed — Commentary on United States v. Ferrer‑Sosa (1st Cir.)

Date: Oct 1, 2025
Judicial Notice of a Prior Competency Finding Is Permissible Without Vouching; Strict Timeliness for Rule 37 Appeals Confirmed — United States v. Ferrer‑Sosa (1st Cir.) Introduction This commentary...
Reasonable Efforts May Be Satisfied by Prior and Ongoing Services; Trial Court Credibility Findings Govern Post‑Termination Visitation (In re D.G. and L.G.)

Reasonable Efforts May Be Satisfied by Prior and Ongoing Services; Trial Court Credibility Findings Govern Post‑Termination Visitation (In re D.G. and L.G.)

Date: Oct 1, 2025
Reasonable Efforts May Be Satisfied by Prior and Ongoing Services; Trial Court Credibility Findings Govern Post‑Termination Visitation Commentary on In re D.G. and L.G., No. 24-595 (W. Va. Sept. 30,...
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