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

protected-advice-at-life’s-end:-seventh-circuit-holds-indiana’s-funeral-licensing-ban-on-death-doula-counseling-fails-even-under-intermediate-scrutiny—and-consent-orders-don’t-waive-federal-rights Case Commentaries

People v. Clark: Strategic Trial Choices, Presentence Reports, and Consecutive Sentencing for Weapon Possession

People v. Clark: Strategic Trial Choices, Presentence Reports, and Consecutive Sentencing for Weapon Possession

Date: Dec 28, 2025
People v. Clark: Strategic Trial Choices, Presentence Reports, and Consecutive Sentencing for Weapon Possession I. Introduction Court: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court, Third Department (New...
People v Coffey: Prejudice Is Irrelevant to CPL 30.30 Dismissal Based on a Defective Certificate of Compliance Under Former CPL 245.50

People v Coffey: Prejudice Is Irrelevant to CPL 30.30 Dismissal Based on a Defective Certificate of Compliance Under Former CPL 245.50

Date: Dec 28, 2025
People v Coffey (2025): Prejudice Is Irrelevant to CPL 30.30 Dismissal Based on a Defective Certificate of Compliance Under Former CPL 245.50 I. Introduction The Appellate Division, Third...
People v. Hoffman: Contact, Not Penetration, and Broad Trial-Court Discretion to Limit Defense Evidence in New York Child Sex-Abuse Trials

People v. Hoffman: Contact, Not Penetration, and Broad Trial-Court Discretion to Limit Defense Evidence in New York Child Sex-Abuse Trials

Date: Dec 28, 2025
People v. Hoffman: Contact, Not Penetration, and Broad Trial-Court Discretion to Limit Defense Evidence in New York Child Sex-Abuse Trials I. Introduction People v. Hoffman, 2025 NY Slip Op 07247 (3d...
Balancing Pro Se Discovery Rights and Witness Safety in Gang‑Related Homicide Trials: Commentary on People v. Saunders

Balancing Pro Se Discovery Rights and Witness Safety in Gang‑Related Homicide Trials: Commentary on People v. Saunders

Date: Dec 28, 2025
Balancing Pro Se Discovery Rights and Witness Safety in Gang‑Related Homicide Trials: Commentary on People v. Saunders I. Introduction The Appellate Division, Third Department’s decision in People v....
No “Escape” When the State Opens the Door: Arellano‑Sanchez v. Thrasher and Limits on Oregon DOC’s Re‑Arrest Authority

No “Escape” When the State Opens the Door: Arellano‑Sanchez v. Thrasher and Limits on Oregon DOC’s Re‑Arrest Authority

Date: Dec 27, 2025
No “Escape” When the State Opens the Door: Arellano‑Sanchez v. Thrasher and Limits on Oregon DOC’s Re‑Arrest Authority Under ORS 144.350 I. Introduction In Arellano‑Sanchez v. Thrasher, 374 Or 623...
De Novo Review and Non‑Permanent Aggravations in Tennessee Workers’ Compensation Law: Commentary on Jo Carol Edwards v. Peoplease, LLC

De Novo Review and Non‑Permanent Aggravations in Tennessee Workers’ Compensation Law: Commentary on Jo Carol Edwards v. Peoplease, LLC

Date: Dec 27, 2025
De Novo Review and Non‑Permanent Aggravations in Tennessee Workers’ Compensation Law: A Commentary on Jo Carol Edwards v. Peoplease, LLC 1. Introduction The Tennessee Supreme Court’s decision in Jo...
Limiting Statutory Employer Status to Service Subcontractors: The Tennessee Supreme Court Adopts the Predominant Purpose Test in Coblentz v. Tractor Supply

Limiting Statutory Employer Status to Service Subcontractors: The Tennessee Supreme Court Adopts the Predominant Purpose Test in Coblentz v. Tractor Supply

Date: Dec 27, 2025
Limiting Statutory Employer Status to Service Subcontractors: The Tennessee Supreme Court Adopts the Predominant Purpose Test in Coblentz v. Tractor Supply I. Introduction The Supreme Court of...
Shaping Ohio Sentencing and Extraordinary Writ Practice: Commentary on the Supreme Court of Ohio’s December 24, 2025 Case Announcements (2025-Ohio-5682)

Shaping Ohio Sentencing and Extraordinary Writ Practice: Commentary on the Supreme Court of Ohio’s December 24, 2025 Case Announcements (2025-Ohio-5682)

Date: Dec 27, 2025
Shaping Ohio Sentencing and Extraordinary Writ Practice: Commentary on the Supreme Court of Ohio’s December 24, 2025 Case Announcements (2025-Ohio-5682) Supreme Court of Ohio – Case Announcements,...
Purchaser’s Initial Receipt Controls CAT Situs: Commentary on VVF Intervest, L.L.C. v. Harris (2025-Ohio-5680)

Purchaser’s Initial Receipt Controls CAT Situs: Commentary on VVF Intervest, L.L.C. v. Harris (2025-Ohio-5680)

Date: Dec 27, 2025
Purchaser’s Initial Receipt Controls CAT Situs Even When Goods Are Later Reshipped Out of State Commentary on VVF Intervest, L.L.C. v. Harris, 2025-Ohio-5680 (Supreme Court of Ohio) I. Introduction...
Clarifying Environmental and Economic Evidence Standards for Ohio Solar Siting Certificates: Commentary on In re Application of S. Branch Solar, L.L.C.

Clarifying Environmental and Economic Evidence Standards for Ohio Solar Siting Certificates: Commentary on In re Application of S. Branch Solar, L.L.C.

Date: Dec 27, 2025
Clarifying Environmental and Economic Evidence Standards for Ohio Solar Siting Certificates: Commentary on In re Application of S. Branch Solar, L.L.C., 2025‑Ohio‑5679 I. Introduction The Supreme...
Using One Ward’s Funds as a “Bridge Loan” for Another Constitutes Misappropriation: Sanctioning Guardians’ Cross‑Account Transfers in Disciplinary Counsel v. Juhola

Using One Ward’s Funds as a “Bridge Loan” for Another Constitutes Misappropriation: Sanctioning Guardians’ Cross‑Account Transfers in Disciplinary Counsel v. Juhola

Date: Dec 27, 2025
Using One Ward’s Funds as a “Bridge Loan” for Another Constitutes Misappropriation: Sanctioning Guardians’ Cross‑Account Transfers in Disciplinary Counsel v. Juhola I. Introduction The Supreme Court...
Z.J. v. R.M. and the Meaning of “Mental Distress” in Ohio’s Menacing-by-Stalking Statute

Z.J. v. R.M. and the Meaning of “Mental Distress” in Ohio’s Menacing-by-Stalking Statute

Date: Dec 27, 2025
Belief in Future Mental Distress as Sufficient Injury Under R.C. 2903.211(A)(1): A Commentary on Z.J. v. R.M., 2025-Ohio-5662 (Supreme Court of Ohio) Introduction In Z.J. v. R.M., 2025-Ohio-5662, the...
“Regular Forces” Means Regular Military: Trump v. Illinois and the New Limits on Federalizing the National Guard

“Regular Forces” Means Regular Military: Trump v. Illinois and the New Limits on Federalizing the National Guard

Date: Dec 27, 2025
“Regular Forces” Means Regular Military: Trump v. Illinois and the New Limits on Federalizing the National Guard Trump v. Illinois, 607 U.S. ___ (2025) U.S. Supreme Court, December 23, 2025 (on...
But-For Causation and Chain-of-Distribution Liability in Multi-Drug Overdose Cases: Commentary on United States v. Brock

But-For Causation and Chain-of-Distribution Liability in Multi-Drug Overdose Cases: Commentary on United States v. Brock

Date: Dec 27, 2025
But-For Causation and Chain-of-Distribution Liability in Multi-Drug Overdose Cases: Commentary on United States v. Leslie Brock (6th Cir. 2025) I. Introduction The Sixth Circuit’s unpublished...
United States v. Swanagan & Reed: Sixth Circuit Strikes § 3559(c)(2)(F) Residual Clause and Narrows “Serious Violent Felony” Enhancements Under 21 U.S.C. § 841

United States v. Swanagan & Reed: Sixth Circuit Strikes § 3559(c)(2)(F) Residual Clause and Narrows “Serious Violent Felony” Enhancements Under 21 U.S.C. § 841

Date: Dec 27, 2025
United States v. Swanagan & Reed: Sixth Circuit Strikes § 3559(c)(2)(F) Residual Clause and Narrows “Serious Violent Felony” Enhancements Under 21 U.S.C. § 841 I. Introduction This published Sixth...
Vagueness, “Serious Violent Felonies,” and Drug Sentencing: A Commentary on United States v. Reed & Swanagan

Vagueness, “Serious Violent Felonies,” and Drug Sentencing: A Commentary on United States v. Reed & Swanagan

Date: Dec 27, 2025
Vagueness, “Serious Violent Felonies,” and Drug Sentencing: A Commentary on United States v. Courtland Reed & Cedric Swanagan Introduction In this published decision, the Sixth Circuit addresses a...
Prime Financial, Inc. v. Shapiro: Codifying the Bard Factors and Clarifying Trustee Discretion in Chapter 7 Settlements

Prime Financial, Inc. v. Shapiro: Codifying the Bard Factors and Clarifying Trustee Discretion in Chapter 7 Settlements

Date: Dec 27, 2025
Prime Financial, Inc. v. Shapiro: Codifying the Bard Factors and Clarifying Trustee Discretion in Chapter 7 Settlements I. Introduction The Sixth Circuit’s published decision in Prime Financial, Inc....
K9 Marijuana Alerts and Ambiguous “Gun” References After Hemp Legalization: A Commentary on United States v. Saine (6th Cir. 2025)

K9 Marijuana Alerts and Ambiguous “Gun” References After Hemp Legalization: A Commentary on United States v. Saine (6th Cir. 2025)

Date: Dec 27, 2025
K9 Marijuana Alerts and Ambiguous “Gun” References After Hemp Legalization: A Commentary on United States v. Saine (6th Cir. 2025) I. Introduction In United States v. Ricco Saine, No. 24‑5638 (6th...
HRT Enterprises v. City of Detroit: Sixth Circuit Authorizes § 1988 Fees for Related State and Bankruptcy Proceedings but Bars Expert Fees in § 1983 Actions

HRT Enterprises v. City of Detroit: Sixth Circuit Authorizes § 1988 Fees for Related State and Bankruptcy Proceedings but Bars Expert Fees in § 1983 Actions

Date: Dec 27, 2025
HRT Enterprises v. City of Detroit: Sixth Circuit Authorizes § 1988 Fees for Related State and Bankruptcy Proceedings but Bars Expert Fees in § 1983 Actions I. Introduction The Sixth Circuit’s...

      Separate-but-Related Proceedings and Expert Fees under § 1988:
      Commentary on HRT Enterprises v. City of Detroit (6th Cir. 2025)

Separate-but-Related Proceedings and Expert Fees under § 1988: Commentary on HRT Enterprises v. City of Detroit (6th Cir. 2025)

Date: Dec 27, 2025
Separate-but-Related Proceedings and Expert Fees under § 1988 in § 1983 Takings Litigation: A Commentary on HRT Enterprises v. City of Detroit I. Introduction HRT Enterprises v. City of Detroit,...
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