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

juvenile-sentencing-guidelines:-iowa-supreme-court Case Commentaries

Johnson v. Albin Carlson (Alaska 2025): Mandatory Consideration of Less-Severe Discovery Sanctions & Flexible Proof of Construction Damages

Johnson v. Albin Carlson (Alaska 2025): Mandatory Consideration of Less-Severe Discovery Sanctions & Flexible Proof of Construction Damages

Date: Jun 18, 2025
Johnson v. Albin Carlson (Alaska 2025): Mandatory Consideration of Less-Severe Discovery Sanctions & Flexible Proof of Construction Damages Introduction The Alaska Supreme Court’s opinion in Morris...
State v. Molde (2025): Wisconsin Supreme Court Declares Statistical False-Report Evidence Does Not Breach the Haseltine Anti-Vouching Rule

State v. Molde (2025): Wisconsin Supreme Court Declares Statistical False-Report Evidence Does Not Breach the Haseltine Anti-Vouching Rule

Date: Jun 18, 2025
State v. Molde (2025): Wisconsin Supreme Court Declares Statistical False-Report Evidence Does Not Breach the Haseltine Anti-Vouching Rule Introduction State of Wisconsin v. Jobert L. Molde In 2025...
“Speak Up or Waive It” – The Wisconsin Supreme Court Narrows Due-Process Protection for Confidential Attorney–Client Consultation in Remote Hearings

“Speak Up or Waive It” – The Wisconsin Supreme Court Narrows Due-Process Protection for Confidential Attorney–Client Consultation in Remote Hearings

Date: Jun 18, 2025
“Speak Up or Waive It” – The New Wisconsin Rule on Confidential Attorney–Client Communications During Remote Proceedings Introduction In State v. Kordell L. Grady, 2025 WI 22, the Wisconsin Supreme...
Prospective Constitutional Notice Rights for Junior Judgment Lienholders – A Commentary on Winn v. Brady (2025)

Prospective Constitutional Notice Rights for Junior Judgment Lienholders – A Commentary on Winn v. Brady (2025)

Date: Jun 18, 2025
Prospective Constitutional Notice Rights for Junior Judgment Lienholders: An In-Depth Commentary on Winn v. Brady (Haw. 2025) Introduction The Supreme Court of Hawaiʻi’s decision in Winn v. Brady,...
Forfeiture of Unraised Issues and Judicial Authority to Enjoin Vexatious Litigants – Commentary on Justin De La Cruz Martinez v. Commonwealth of Westmoreland County

Forfeiture of Unraised Issues and Judicial Authority to Enjoin Vexatious Litigants – Commentary on Justin De La Cruz Martinez v. Commonwealth of Westmoreland County

Date: Jun 18, 2025
Forfeiture of Unraised Issues and Judicial Authority to Enjoin Vexatious Litigants: A Commentary on Justin De La Cruz Martinez v. Commonwealth of Westmoreland County 1. Introduction In a...
Martinez v. Westmoreland Courts: Re-affirming Standards for Vexatious-Litigant Injunctions and Judicial Recusal

Martinez v. Westmoreland Courts: Re-affirming Standards for Vexatious-Litigant Injunctions and Judicial Recusal

Date: Jun 18, 2025
Martinez v. Westmoreland Courts: Re-affirming Standards for Vexatious-Litigant Injunctions and Judicial Recusal Introduction Justin Juan De La Cruz Martinez, a prolific pro se litigant, filed seven...
Martinez v. Obarto (3d Cir. 2025): Reinforcing Objective Standards for Judicial Recusal and Vexatious-Litigant Injunctions

Martinez v. Obarto (3d Cir. 2025): Reinforcing Objective Standards for Judicial Recusal and Vexatious-Litigant Injunctions

Date: Jun 18, 2025
Martinez v. Obarto (3d Cir. 2025): Reinforcing Objective Standards for Judicial Recusal and Vexatious-Litigant Injunctions I. Introduction The consolidated appeal Justin Juan De la Cruz Martinez v....
Martinez v. Westmoreland County et al.: Third Circuit Reaffirms Forfeiture Doctrine and High Bar for Judicial Recusal & Vexatious-Litigant Designations

Martinez v. Westmoreland County et al.: Third Circuit Reaffirms Forfeiture Doctrine and High Bar for Judicial Recusal & Vexatious-Litigant Designations

Date: Jun 18, 2025
Martinez v. Westmoreland County et al. Third Circuit Reaffirms Forfeiture Doctrine and High Bar for Judicial Recusal & Vexatious-Litigant Designations Introduction Justin Juan De La Cruz Martinez, a...
Martinez v. Supreme Court of Pennsylvania: Re-affirming Standards for Vexatious-Litigant Injunctions and Judicial Recusal

Martinez v. Supreme Court of Pennsylvania: Re-affirming Standards for Vexatious-Litigant Injunctions and Judicial Recusal

Date: Jun 18, 2025
Martinez v. Supreme Court of Pennsylvania: Re-affirming Standards for Vexatious-Litigant Injunctions and Judicial Recusal 1. Introduction The consolidated appeal of Justin Juan De La Cruz Martinez v....

        “Unfounded Allegations Do Not Compel Recusal” – Third Circuit Commentary on 
        Justin De La Cruz Martinez v. United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania

“Unfounded Allegations Do Not Compel Recusal” – Third Circuit Commentary on Justin De La Cruz Martinez v. United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania

Date: Jun 18, 2025
“Unfounded Allegations Do Not Compel Recusal” – Third Circuit Commentary on Justin De La Cruz Martinez v. United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania 1. Introduction In a...
“Adverse Rulings ≠ Bias” – The Third Circuit Re-Affirms Strict Standards for Judicial Recusal and Endorses Robust District‐Court Power to Curb Vexatious Litigation

“Adverse Rulings ≠ Bias” – The Third Circuit Re-Affirms Strict Standards for Judicial Recusal and Endorses Robust District‐Court Power to Curb Vexatious Litigation

Date: Jun 18, 2025
“Adverse Rulings ≠ Bias” – The Third Circuit Re-Affirms Strict Standards for Judicial Recusal and Endorses Robust District‐Court Power to Curb Vexatious Litigation Introduction The consolidated...
Affirming Consumer-Level Limitation-of-Liability Clauses: Commentary on Marie Lamb v. CVS Pharmacy LLC

Affirming Consumer-Level Limitation-of-Liability Clauses: Commentary on Marie Lamb v. CVS Pharmacy LLC

Date: Jun 18, 2025
Affirming Consumer-Level Limitation-of-Liability Clauses: Marie Lamb v. CVS Pharmacy LLC (3d Cir. 2025) Introduction In Marie Lamb v. CVS Pharmacy LLC, the United States Court of Appeals for the...
Gorrio v. Francis: Third Circuit Declares Blanket Discovery Bans Unlawful but Requires Prejudice for Relief

Gorrio v. Francis: Third Circuit Declares Blanket Discovery Bans Unlawful but Requires Prejudice for Relief

Date: Jun 18, 2025
Gorrio v. Francis: Third Circuit Declares Blanket Discovery Bans Unlawful but Requires Prejudice for Relief 1. Introduction In Michael Gorrio v. Francis, No. 24-1711 (3d Cir. 2025), the United States...
“From Passive to Active”: Anderson v. Estrada and the Fifth Circuit’s Refined Test for Active Resistance and Drive-Stun Taser Use

“From Passive to Active”: Anderson v. Estrada and the Fifth Circuit’s Refined Test for Active Resistance and Drive-Stun Taser Use

Date: Jun 18, 2025
“From Passive to Active”: Anderson v. Estrada and the Fifth Circuit’s Refined Test for Active Resistance and Drive-Stun Taser Use Introduction Anderson v. Estrada, No. 24-20142 (5th Cir. June 13...
“Objective-Verifiability” as a Threshold for §1681i Claims: A Commentary on Reyes v. Equifax (5th Cir. 2025)

“Objective-Verifiability” as a Threshold for §1681i Claims: A Commentary on Reyes v. Equifax (5th Cir. 2025)

Date: Jun 18, 2025
“Objective-Verifiability” as a Threshold for §1681i Claims: A Commentary on Reyes v. Equifax (5th Cir. 2025) 1. Introduction In Reyes v. Equifax Information Services, L.L.C., the United States Court...
United States v. Sanchez: Reaffirming Firearm Prohibitions for Presently-Intoxicated Controlled-Substance Users

United States v. Sanchez: Reaffirming Firearm Prohibitions for Presently-Intoxicated Controlled-Substance Users

Date: Jun 18, 2025
United States v. Sanchez: Reaffirming Firearm Prohibitions for Presently-Intoxicated Controlled-Substance Users 1. Introduction United States v. Sanchez, No. 23-50293 (5th Cir. June 13, 2025) is a...
Yanez v. Dish Network: Fifth Circuit Abrogates the “Alford Exception” and Restricts Dismissals of Cases Stayed for Arbitration

Yanez v. Dish Network: Fifth Circuit Abrogates the “Alford Exception” and Restricts Dismissals of Cases Stayed for Arbitration

Date: Jun 18, 2025
Yanez v. Dish Network: Fifth Circuit Abrogates the “Alford Exception” and Restricts Dismissals of Cases Stayed for Arbitration Introduction In Yanez v. Dish Network, L.L.C., No. 24-50580 (5th Cir....
“More Than the Missing Blanks”: The Fourth Circuit Reinforces an ALJ’s Duty to Explain Reliance on Claimant Forms in Black-Lung Cases (Juanita Cavendish v. DOWCP)

“More Than the Missing Blanks”: The Fourth Circuit Reinforces an ALJ’s Duty to Explain Reliance on Claimant Forms in Black-Lung Cases (Juanita Cavendish v. DOWCP)

Date: Jun 18, 2025
“More Than the Missing Blanks”: The Fourth Circuit Reinforces an ALJ’s Duty to Explain Reliance on Claimant Forms in Black-Lung Cases Commentary on Juanita Cavendish v. Director, OWCP (4th Cir. 2025)...
“Undisputed Disability” – Fourth Circuit Confirms Summary Judgment Standard in ERISA Benefit Disputes (Rebecca Wonsang v. Reliance Standard Life Insurance Co.)

“Undisputed Disability” – Fourth Circuit Confirms Summary Judgment Standard in ERISA Benefit Disputes (Rebecca Wonsang v. Reliance Standard Life Insurance Co.)

Date: Jun 18, 2025
“Undisputed Disability” – Fourth Circuit Confirms Summary Judgment Standard in ERISA Benefit Disputes Commentary on Rebecca Wonsang v. Reliance Standard Life Insurance Company, No. 24-1419 (4th Cir....
“Due To” Means “Because Of”: The Fourth Circuit’s But-For Causation Test for ERISA Limitation Clauses in Penland v. Metropolitan Life

“Due To” Means “Because Of”: The Fourth Circuit’s But-For Causation Test for ERISA Limitation Clauses in Penland v. Metropolitan Life

Date: Jun 18, 2025
“Due To” Means “Because Of”: The Fourth Circuit’s But-For Causation Test for ERISA Limitation Clauses in Penland v. Metropolitan Life Introduction In Tracy Penland v. Metropolitan Life Insurance...
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