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

Pierce: Montana Supreme Court Reaffirms Conduct‑Based “Knowingly” for SIWOC and Clarifies Limits on Alcohol-Use Evidence

Pierce: Montana Supreme Court Reaffirms Conduct‑Based “Knowingly” for SIWOC and Clarifies Limits on Alcohol-Use Evidence

Date: Nov 15, 2025
Pierce: Montana Supreme Court Reaffirms Conduct‑Based “Knowingly” for SIWOC and Clarifies Limits on Alcohol-Use Evidence Introduction In State v. D. Pierce, 2025 MT 257 (Supreme Court of Montana,...
State v. Prado: Harmless-Error Review for Redacted Jail-Call Context Statements and Strict Limits on Plain-Error Claims of “Credibility-Boosting” Background Testimony

State v. Prado: Harmless-Error Review for Redacted Jail-Call Context Statements and Strict Limits on Plain-Error Claims of “Credibility-Boosting” Background Testimony

Date: Nov 15, 2025
State v. Prado: Harmless-Error Review for Redacted Jail-Call Context Statements and Strict Limits on Plain-Error Claims of “Credibility-Boosting” Background Testimony Introduction In State v. Prado,...
No Six-Month Presumption Under Idaho Constitution; COVID-19 Backlog Can Establish “Good Cause” Under Idaho’s Speedy Trial Statute

No Six-Month Presumption Under Idaho Constitution; COVID-19 Backlog Can Establish “Good Cause” Under Idaho’s Speedy Trial Statute

Date: Nov 15, 2025
No Six-Month Presumption Under Idaho Constitution; COVID-19 Backlog Can Establish “Good Cause” Under Idaho’s Speedy Trial Statute Introduction In State v. Fierro-Garcia, the Idaho Supreme Court...
Identical Discipline Under SCR 22.22: Minnesota Disbarment Equals Wisconsin Revocation, Not Suspension

Identical Discipline Under SCR 22.22: Minnesota Disbarment Equals Wisconsin Revocation, Not Suspension

Date: Nov 15, 2025
Identical Discipline Under SCR 22.22: Minnesota Disbarment Equals Wisconsin Revocation, Not Suspension Introduction In Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Michael B. Padden, 2025 WI 47, the Wisconsin...
Reciprocal Discipline Clarified: Wisconsin Revocation Is the Identical Sanction to Minnesota Disbarment, Despite Reinstatement Differences

Reciprocal Discipline Clarified: Wisconsin Revocation Is the Identical Sanction to Minnesota Disbarment, Despite Reinstatement Differences

Date: Nov 15, 2025
Reciprocal Discipline Clarified: Wisconsin Revocation Is the Identical Sanction to Minnesota Disbarment, Despite Reinstatement Differences Introduction In Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Michael B....
Section 204B.44 Is Election-Specific: Post-Election Petitions Are Moot and Cannot Be Reframed for Future Cycles

Section 204B.44 Is Election-Specific: Post-Election Petitions Are Moot and Cannot Be Reframed for Future Cycles

Date: Nov 15, 2025
Section 204B.44 Is Election-Specific: Post-Election Petitions Are Moot and Cannot Be Reframed for Future Cycles Introduction In Benda for Common-sense, a Minnesota Non-Profit Corporation, and...
Refusal of the Warrant-Specified Chemical Test Alone Supports Criminal Test-Refusal in Minnesota

Refusal of the Warrant-Specified Chemical Test Alone Supports Criminal Test-Refusal in Minnesota

Date: Nov 15, 2025
Refusal of the Warrant-Specified Chemical Test Alone Supports Criminal Test-Refusal in Minnesota Introduction In State of Minnesota v. Brian Russell Lueck, A24-0250 (Minn. Nov. 12, 2025), the...
Cross‑Docket Pre‑Filing Injunctions and the Limits of “Seizure‑by‑Process”: Commentary on Ferrara v. Travis County

Cross‑Docket Pre‑Filing Injunctions and the Limits of “Seizure‑by‑Process”: Commentary on Ferrara v. Travis County

Date: Nov 15, 2025
Cross‑Docket Pre‑Filing Injunctions and the Limits of “Seizure‑by‑Process”: Commentary on Ferrara v. Travis County Introduction In Ferrara v. Travis County, the Fifth Circuit (summary calendar, per...
Prewitt v. McDaniel: No Jury/Venue Rights for Petty Traffic Offenses and Objective, Fact-Based Recusal Only

Prewitt v. McDaniel: No Jury/Venue Rights for Petty Traffic Offenses and Objective, Fact-Based Recusal Only

Date: Nov 15, 2025
Prewitt v. McDaniel: No Jury/Venue Rights for Petty Traffic Offenses and Objective, Fact-Based Recusal Only Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Date: November 11, 2025 Docket...
Death-Resulting Conduct May Support a Statutory-Max Upward Variance Under §3553(a) After the 2024 §2D1.1 Amendment: United States v. Horton (5th Cir. 2025)

Death-Resulting Conduct May Support a Statutory-Max Upward Variance Under §3553(a) After the 2024 §2D1.1 Amendment: United States v. Horton (5th Cir. 2025)

Date: Nov 15, 2025
Death-Resulting Conduct May Support a Statutory-Max Upward Variance Under §3553(a) After the 2024 §2D1.1 Amendment Commentary on United States v. Horton, No. 24-50938 (5th Cir. Nov. 11, 2025)...
Substance Matters: Third Circuit Affirms that the Totality of an Employer’s Contract Proposals Can Evidence Bad-Faith Bargaining; Impasse Barred and Remedy Challenges Forfeited Absent §10(e) Preservation

Substance Matters: Third Circuit Affirms that the Totality of an Employer’s Contract Proposals Can Evidence Bad-Faith Bargaining; Impasse Barred and Remedy Challenges Forfeited Absent §10(e) Preservation

Date: Nov 13, 2025
Substance Matters: Third Circuit Affirms that the Totality of an Employer’s Contract Proposals Can Evidence Bad-Faith Bargaining; Impasse Barred and Remedy Challenges Forfeited Absent §10(e)...
Preserve It or Lose It: Third Circuit Requires Section 10(e) Preservation to Challenge Thryv Make‑Whole Remedies and Affirms Bad‑Faith Bargaining Based on the Substance of Employer Proposals

Preserve It or Lose It: Third Circuit Requires Section 10(e) Preservation to Challenge Thryv Make‑Whole Remedies and Affirms Bad‑Faith Bargaining Based on the Substance of Employer Proposals

Date: Nov 13, 2025
Preserve It or Lose It: Third Circuit Requires Section 10(e) Preservation to Challenge Thryv Make‑Whole Remedies and Affirms Bad‑Faith Bargaining Based on the Substance of Employer Proposals...
Fifth Circuit Clarifies: Absenteeism Alone Does Not Trigger IDEA Child Find, and Attendance-Based Lack of Instruction Can Defeat Eligibility

Fifth Circuit Clarifies: Absenteeism Alone Does Not Trigger IDEA Child Find, and Attendance-Based Lack of Instruction Can Defeat Eligibility

Date: Nov 13, 2025
Fifth Circuit Clarifies: Absenteeism Alone Does Not Trigger IDEA Child Find, and Attendance-Based Lack of Instruction Can Defeat Eligibility Introduction In A.P. v. Pearland Independent School...
Miscalendaring from ECF Notice Is Not Excusable Neglect under Rule 8002(d); No Hearing Required Absent Request — Tenth Circuit BAP Affirms

Miscalendaring from ECF Notice Is Not Excusable Neglect under Rule 8002(d); No Hearing Required Absent Request — Tenth Circuit BAP Affirms

Date: Nov 13, 2025
Miscalendaring from ECF Notice Is Not Excusable Neglect under Rule 8002(d); No Hearing Required Absent Request — Tenth Circuit BAP Affirms Introduction In Douglas Gould v. KT Weaver, the United...
Partial § 1631 Transfers Do Not Divest Jurisdiction to Reconsider Non‑Transferred Claims: The Tenth Circuit’s Guidance in SeedX v. Lincoln Strategy

Partial § 1631 Transfers Do Not Divest Jurisdiction to Reconsider Non‑Transferred Claims: The Tenth Circuit’s Guidance in SeedX v. Lincoln Strategy

Date: Nov 13, 2025
Partial § 1631 Transfers Do Not Divest Jurisdiction to Reconsider Non‑Transferred Claims: The Tenth Circuit’s Guidance in SeedX v. Lincoln Strategy Introduction SeedX, Inc., a marketing and...
Partial § 1631 Transfers Do Not Divest the Transferor Court of Jurisdiction Over Non‑Transferred Claims: SeedX v. Lincoln Strategy Group (10th Cir. 2025)

Partial § 1631 Transfers Do Not Divest the Transferor Court of Jurisdiction Over Non‑Transferred Claims: SeedX v. Lincoln Strategy Group (10th Cir. 2025)

Date: Nov 13, 2025
Partial § 1631 Transfers Do Not Divest the Transferor Court of Jurisdiction Over Non‑Transferred Claims: SeedX v. Lincoln Strategy Group (10th Cir. 2025) Introduction In SeedX, Inc. v. Lincoln...
Delaware Supreme Court Clarifies Workers’ Compensation Subrogation Against UIM Proceeds Is Limited to “Boardable” Damages (ProAssurance v. Manz)

Delaware Supreme Court Clarifies Workers’ Compensation Subrogation Against UIM Proceeds Is Limited to “Boardable” Damages (ProAssurance v. Manz)

Date: Nov 12, 2025
Workers’ Compensation Subrogation Against UIM Proceeds Is Limited to “Boardable” Damages: Delaware Supreme Court Applies Henry II in ProAssurance v. Manz Introduction In ProAssurance Group d/b/a...
Nevada Supreme Court Requires Express Reservation to Seek Post‑Offer Interest on Punitive Damages in Stipulated Judgments

Nevada Supreme Court Requires Express Reservation to Seek Post‑Offer Interest on Punitive Damages in Stipulated Judgments

Date: Nov 12, 2025
Nevada Supreme Court Requires Express Reservation to Seek Post‑Offer Interest on Punitive Damages in Stipulated Judgments Introduction In CWIK v. BEARDSLEY (Supreme Court of Nevada, Nov. 10, 2025),...
Content-Based Limits on “Unprotected” Speech Face Heightened Scrutiny When They Chill Protected Complaints: California Supreme Court Invalidates Penal Code §148.6

Content-Based Limits on “Unprotected” Speech Face Heightened Scrutiny When They Chill Protected Complaints: California Supreme Court Invalidates Penal Code §148.6

Date: Nov 12, 2025
Content-Based Limits on “Unprotected” Speech Face Heightened Scrutiny When They Chill Protected Complaints: California Supreme Court Invalidates Penal Code §148.6 Introduction In Los Angeles Police...
Material-Omission Liability Under GBL § 349 for Soft-Close Door Hazards: The Second Circuit’s (Non-Precedential) Affirmance in Boateng v. BMW

Material-Omission Liability Under GBL § 349 for Soft-Close Door Hazards: The Second Circuit’s (Non-Precedential) Affirmance in Boateng v. BMW

Date: Nov 11, 2025
Material-Omission Liability Under GBL § 349 for Soft-Close Door Hazards: The Second Circuit’s (Non-Precedential) Affirmance in Boateng v. BMW Introduction In a summary order without precedential...
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