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

interpreting-& Case Commentaries

Oppedisano v. Zur: Second Circuit Reaffirms Loss‑Sharing as Indispensable to Implied Partnerships Under New York Law and Rejects Declaratory Workarounds to Unjust Enrichment Time Bars

Oppedisano v. Zur: Second Circuit Reaffirms Loss‑Sharing as Indispensable to Implied Partnerships Under New York Law and Rejects Declaratory Workarounds to Unjust Enrichment Time Bars

Date: Sep 24, 2025
Oppedisano v. Zur: Second Circuit Reaffirms Loss‑Sharing as Indispensable to Implied Partnerships Under New York Law and Rejects Declaratory Workarounds to Unjust Enrichment Time Bars Note: The...
Foreseeability of Co‑Conspirator Death Threats and Broad Electronic‑Device Search Conditions: The Second Circuit’s Summary Affirmance in United States v. Deloatch

Foreseeability of Co‑Conspirator Death Threats and Broad Electronic‑Device Search Conditions: The Second Circuit’s Summary Affirmance in United States v. Deloatch

Date: Sep 24, 2025
Foreseeability of Co‑Conspirator Death Threats and Broad Electronic‑Device Search Conditions: The Second Circuit’s Summary Affirmance in United States v. Deloatch Note: This decision is a Second...
“Sensitive Places” in the Modern City: Times Square and Public Transit Upheld; Open-Carry Bans and City-Specific Permits Presumptively Constitutional after Bruen

“Sensitive Places” in the Modern City: Times Square and Public Transit Upheld; Open-Carry Bans and City-Specific Permits Presumptively Constitutional after Bruen

Date: Sep 24, 2025
“Sensitive Places” in the Modern City: Times Square and Public Transit Upheld; Open-Carry Bans and City-Specific Permits Presumptively Constitutional after Bruen Introduction In Frey v. City of New...
Entwinement Doesn’t Reach Party Identity: Eleventh Circuit Affirms District Courts May Resolve Disputed LLC Membership on a Rule 12(b)(1) Factual Attack to Determine Diversity

Entwinement Doesn’t Reach Party Identity: Eleventh Circuit Affirms District Courts May Resolve Disputed LLC Membership on a Rule 12(b)(1) Factual Attack to Determine Diversity

Date: Sep 24, 2025
Entwinement Doesn’t Reach Party Identity: Eleventh Circuit Affirms District Courts May Resolve Disputed LLC Membership on a Rule 12(b)(1) Factual Attack to Determine Diversity Introduction In...
No Third-Party Dissemination and Self-Imposed Decisions Do Not Create Article III Standing in FCRA Disputes

No Third-Party Dissemination and Self-Imposed Decisions Do Not Create Article III Standing in FCRA Disputes

Date: Sep 24, 2025
No Third-Party Dissemination and Self-Imposed Decisions Do Not Create Article III Standing in FCRA Disputes Introduction In Lashonda Peeples v. National Data Research, Inc. (d.b.a. Integrascan), No....
"Exceptional Services" Fees May Include Equipment Charges: Connecticut Supreme Court Recasts § 14-63-36c(c) as a Posting Requirement, Not a Labor-Only Cap

"Exceptional Services" Fees May Include Equipment Charges: Connecticut Supreme Court Recasts § 14-63-36c(c) as a Posting Requirement, Not a Labor-Only Cap

Date: Sep 24, 2025
"Exceptional Services" Fees May Include Equipment Charges: Connecticut Supreme Court Recasts § 14-63-36c(c) as a Posting Requirement, Not a Labor-Only Cap Introduction In Modzelewski's Towing &...
State v. Henderson: No Per Se Extreme Emotional Disturbance Instruction in Intimate‑Partner Homicides; Loss of Self‑Control Must Be Shown and Postcrime Evasion Undercuts the Defense

State v. Henderson: No Per Se Extreme Emotional Disturbance Instruction in Intimate‑Partner Homicides; Loss of Self‑Control Must Be Shown and Postcrime Evasion Undercuts the Defense

Date: Sep 24, 2025
State v. Henderson: No Per Se Extreme Emotional Disturbance Instruction in Intimate‑Partner Homicides; Loss of Self‑Control Must Be Shown and Postcrime Evasion Undercuts the Defense Introduction In...
Credibility Over Formality: Verbal Light‑Duty Offers Do Not Automatically Terminate TTD; Deference to the Board of Review Controls under § 23‑4‑7a(e)

Credibility Over Formality: Verbal Light‑Duty Offers Do Not Automatically Terminate TTD; Deference to the Board of Review Controls under § 23‑4‑7a(e)

Date: Sep 24, 2025
Credibility Over Formality: Verbal Light‑Duty Offers Do Not Automatically Terminate TTD; Deference to the Board of Review Controls under § 23‑4‑7a(e) Introduction In Dainel Nicole Smith v. West...
Reasserting the “Light Most Favorable” Mandate and Jury Primacy for Extreme Emotional Disturbance Instructions: Justice Ecker’s Dissent in State v. Henderson

Reasserting the “Light Most Favorable” Mandate and Jury Primacy for Extreme Emotional Disturbance Instructions: Justice Ecker’s Dissent in State v. Henderson

Date: Sep 24, 2025
Reasserting the “Light Most Favorable” Mandate and Jury Primacy for Extreme Emotional Disturbance Instructions: Justice Ecker’s Dissent in State v. Henderson Introduction In State v. Henderson...
Charging Official Cannot Preside: NH Supreme Court Requires Recusal of Fish & Game Executive Director and Confirms Certiorari Review for Volunteer Instructor Revocations

Charging Official Cannot Preside: NH Supreme Court Requires Recusal of Fish & Game Executive Director and Confirms Certiorari Review for Volunteer Instructor Revocations

Date: Sep 20, 2025
Charging Official Cannot Preside: Recusal Required for Agency Head Who Signed Revocation; Certiorari Is the Proper Review Path Introduction In Petition of Dean, 2025 N.H 44, the New Hampshire Supreme...
Fixing the Real Party in Interest at Filing and Limiting Rule 41(b) Dismissals: Vermont Supreme Court Clarifies Rule 17(a)/Rule 25(c) Framework in Ditech Financial LLC v. Brisson (2025 VT 54)

Fixing the Real Party in Interest at Filing and Limiting Rule 41(b) Dismissals: Vermont Supreme Court Clarifies Rule 17(a)/Rule 25(c) Framework in Ditech Financial LLC v. Brisson (2025 VT 54)

Date: Sep 20, 2025
Fixing the Real Party in Interest at Filing and Limiting Rule 41(b) Dismissals: Vermont Supreme Court Clarifies Rule 17(a)/Rule 25(c) Framework in Ditech Financial LLC v. Brisson (2025 VT 54)...
Independent Source Doctrine Purges Taint of Unlawful Cell-Phone Seizure: Commentary on State v. Rodriguez, 2025 N.H. 43

Independent Source Doctrine Purges Taint of Unlawful Cell-Phone Seizure: Commentary on State v. Rodriguez, 2025 N.H. 43

Date: Sep 20, 2025
Independent Source Doctrine Purges Taint of Unlawful Cell-Phone Seizure: State v. Rodriguez, 2025 N.H. 43 Introduction In State v. Rodriguez, 2025 N.H. 43, the Supreme Court of New Hampshire affirmed...
Actual Value Controls Over Productivity Schedules: No Certified Appraisal Required, and Agencies Must Find Market Value

Actual Value Controls Over Productivity Schedules: No Certified Appraisal Required, and Agencies Must Find Market Value

Date: Sep 19, 2025
Actual Value Controls Over Productivity Schedules: No Certified Appraisal Required, and Agencies Must Find Market Value Introduction In Pallansch v. Roberts County, 2025 S.D. 52, the Supreme Court of...
No Written Findings Needed When Denying Child-Support Deviation; Extracurricular Costs Are Included in Guideline Support — In the Matter of Carr & Carr (N.H. 2025)

No Written Findings Needed When Denying Child-Support Deviation; Extracurricular Costs Are Included in Guideline Support — In the Matter of Carr & Carr (N.H. 2025)

Date: Sep 18, 2025
No Written Findings Needed When Denying Child-Support Deviation; Extracurricular Costs Are Included in Guideline Support Commentary on In the Matter of Clara Carr and Ryan Carr, Supreme Court of New...
New Hampshire Narrows Crime-Fraud Exception to Intended Fraud and Confirms Common-Interest Privilege Requires Pending Litigation

New Hampshire Narrows Crime-Fraud Exception to Intended Fraud and Confirms Common-Interest Privilege Requires Pending Litigation

Date: Sep 17, 2025
New Hampshire Narrows Crime-Fraud Exception to Intended Fraud and Confirms Common-Interest Privilege Requires Pending Litigation Introduction In Atl. Anesthesia, P.A. v. Lehrer, 2025 N.H. 42, the...
State v. Rue: No plain‑error relief for felony‑murder instructional complaint under a general first-degree murder verdict; reaffirmation of trial courts’ discretion to give initial‑aggressor self‑defense instructions

State v. Rue: No plain‑error relief for felony‑murder instructional complaint under a general first-degree murder verdict; reaffirmation of trial courts’ discretion to give initial‑aggressor self‑defense instructions

Date: Sep 17, 2025
State v. Rue: No plain‑error relief for felony‑murder instructional complaint under a general first-degree murder verdict; reaffirmation of trial courts’ discretion to give initial‑aggressor...
Roberts Reaffirms Objective Pretext Doctrine and Recorded-Consent Vehicle Searches in West Virginia

Roberts Reaffirms Objective Pretext Doctrine and Recorded-Consent Vehicle Searches in West Virginia

Date: Sep 17, 2025
Roberts Reaffirms Objective Pretext Doctrine and Recorded-Consent Vehicle Searches in West Virginia Introduction In State of West Virginia v. Steven Verrell Roberts, No. 23-422 (W. Va. Sept. 16,...
State v. Austin: Voluntary Intoxication and Diminished Capacity Limits, Narrow “Opening the Door,” and What Counts as an Overt Act for Attempted First-Degree Murder

State v. Austin: Voluntary Intoxication and Diminished Capacity Limits, Narrow “Opening the Door,” and What Counts as an Overt Act for Attempted First-Degree Murder

Date: Sep 17, 2025
State v. Austin: Voluntary Intoxication and Diminished Capacity Limits, Narrow “Opening the Door,” and What Counts as an Overt Act for Attempted First-Degree Murder Introduction In State of West...
No “Child’s-Choice” Visitation Without Findings and a Plan: In re H.C. Reinforces Child-Centered Continued-Association Standards in Guardianship Cases

No “Child’s-Choice” Visitation Without Findings and a Plan: In re H.C. Reinforces Child-Centered Continued-Association Standards in Guardianship Cases

Date: Sep 17, 2025
No “Child’s-Choice” Visitation Without Findings and a Plan: In re H.C. Reinforces Child-Centered Continued-Association Standards in Guardianship Cases Introduction In a memorandum decision issued...
No “Neighborhood Expert” Workaround: Connecticut Treats Euphemistic Gang Testimony as Inadmissible Absent Foundation and Significant Probative Value — Commentary on State v. Dixon (Conn. 2025)

No “Neighborhood Expert” Workaround: Connecticut Treats Euphemistic Gang Testimony as Inadmissible Absent Foundation and Significant Probative Value — Commentary on State v. Dixon (Conn. 2025)

Date: Sep 17, 2025
No “Neighborhood Expert” Workaround: Connecticut Treats Euphemistic Gang Testimony as Inadmissible Absent Foundation and Significant Probative Value Case: State v. Dixon, Supreme Court of...
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