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

reinforcing-the-implied-covenant-of-good-faith-in-commercial-development-contracts:-anthony& Case Commentaries

Krueger v. Crockett (2025): The Tenth Circuit’s Definitive Stance on Prolonged Prone Restraints, Post-Restraint Tasers, and Universal Duty to Intervene

Krueger v. Crockett (2025): The Tenth Circuit’s Definitive Stance on Prolonged Prone Restraints, Post-Restraint Tasers, and Universal Duty to Intervene

Date: Aug 25, 2025
Krueger v. Crockett (10th Cir. 2025): Prolonged Prone Restraints, Post-Restraint Tasers, and the Expansive Duty to Intervene Introduction In Krueger v. Crockett, the United States Court of Appeals...
“No Officer May Ignore the Danger”: Krueger v. Orr and the Tenth Circuit’s Firm Ban on Prolonged Prone Restraints and Failure-to-Intervene

“No Officer May Ignore the Danger”: Krueger v. Orr and the Tenth Circuit’s Firm Ban on Prolonged Prone Restraints and Failure-to-Intervene

Date: Aug 25, 2025
“No Officer May Ignore the Danger”: Krueger v. Orr and the Tenth Circuit’s Firm Ban on Prolonged Prone Restraints and Failure-to-Intervene Introduction In Krueger v. Orr, ___ F.4th ___ (10th Cir....
Tenth Circuit Clarifies Officer Liability for Prolonged Prone Restraints and Failure-to-Intervene – A Commentary on Krueger v. Phillips

Tenth Circuit Clarifies Officer Liability for Prolonged Prone Restraints and Failure-to-Intervene – A Commentary on Krueger v. Phillips

Date: Aug 25, 2025
Tenth Circuit Clarifies Officer Liability for Prolonged Prone Restraints and Failure-to-Intervene Commentary on Krueger v. Phillips, ___ F.4th ___ (10th Cir. Aug. 22 2025) 1. Introduction Krueger v....
“Notwithstanding” Does Not Trump the Default Sourcing Rule:  Liberty Global v. Commissioner and the Limits of I.R.C. § 904(f)(3)

“Notwithstanding” Does Not Trump the Default Sourcing Rule: Liberty Global v. Commissioner and the Limits of I.R.C. § 904(f)(3)

Date: Aug 25, 2025
“Notwithstanding” Does Not Trump the Default Sourcing Rule: Liberty Global v. Commissioner and the Limits of I.R.C. § 904(f)(3) Introduction In Liberty Global, Inc. v. Commissioner of Internal...
“No Presumptive Incompetence”:  Martinez v. Martinez and the Evidentiary Threshold for Competency-Based §2254 Claims

“No Presumptive Incompetence”: Martinez v. Martinez and the Evidentiary Threshold for Competency-Based §2254 Claims

Date: Aug 25, 2025
“No Presumptive Incompetence”: Martinez v. Martinez and the Evidentiary Threshold for Competency-Based §2254 Claims Introduction Martinez v. Martinez, No. 24-2105 (10th Cir. Aug. 22, 2025), is a...
Conflicts, Collateral Orders, and Screening: The Supreme Court Clarifies When Prosecutorial Conflicts Disqualify the Office of the Attorney General

Conflicts, Collateral Orders, and Screening: The Supreme Court Clarifies When Prosecutorial Conflicts Disqualify the Office of the Attorney General

Date: Aug 25, 2025
Conflicts, Collateral Orders, and Screening: The Supreme Court Clarifies When Prosecutorial Conflicts Disqualify the Office of the Attorney General Introduction Case: Commonwealth v. Torres (2025 MP...
Due-Process Notice to Corporate Landowners and the Finality of Decertified Irrigated Acres: A Commentary on State ex rel. Seeman v. Lower Republican NRD, 319 Neb. 681 (2025)

Due-Process Notice to Corporate Landowners and the Finality of Decertified Irrigated Acres: A Commentary on State ex rel. Seeman v. Lower Republican NRD, 319 Neb. 681 (2025)

Date: Aug 25, 2025
Due-Process Notice to Corporate Landowners and the Finality of Decertified Irrigated Acres: A Commentary on State ex rel. Seeman v. Lower Republican NRD, 319 Neb. 681 (2025) 1. Introduction The...
“No-Offset” Rule for Significantly Excessive Earnings:  Supreme Court of Ohio Clarifies R.C. 4928.143(F)

“No-Offset” Rule for Significantly Excessive Earnings: Supreme Court of Ohio Clarifies R.C. 4928.143(F)

Date: Aug 25, 2025
“No-Offset” Rule for Significantly Excessive Earnings In re Application of Dayton Power & Light Co. (2025-Ohio-2953) Introduction The Supreme Court of Ohio, in In re Application of Dayton Power &...
Therapeutic Suspension of Visitation as a “Reasonable Effort” in Alaska CINA Cases: Commentary on Kash B. v. State of Alaska, DFCS, OCS (2025)

Therapeutic Suspension of Visitation as a “Reasonable Effort” in Alaska CINA Cases: Commentary on Kash B. v. State of Alaska, DFCS, OCS (2025)

Date: Aug 25, 2025
Therapeutic Suspension of Visitation as a “Reasonable Effort” in Alaska CINA Cases Commentary on Kash B. (Father) v. State of Alaska, Department of Family and Community Services, Office of Children’s...
The Invited-Error Bar to Mid-Litigation Shifts in Contract-Damages Theories: 
            Commentary on D&M Roofing & Siding v. Distribution, Inc., 319 Neb. 707 (2025)

The Invited-Error Bar to Mid-Litigation Shifts in Contract-Damages Theories: Commentary on D&M Roofing & Siding v. Distribution, Inc., 319 Neb. 707 (2025)

Date: Aug 25, 2025
The Invited-Error Bar to Mid-Litigation Shifts in Contract-Damages Theories: Nebraska Supreme Court Clarifies Party Concessions in D&M Roofing & Siding v. Distribution, Inc. (319 Neb. 707) 1....
Mandamus as the Tool to Correct PILOT Fund Misallocations:  The Treasurer’s Ministerial Duty under Article VIII § 11 and Neb. Rev. Stat. § 70-651.04

Mandamus as the Tool to Correct PILOT Fund Misallocations: The Treasurer’s Ministerial Duty under Article VIII § 11 and Neb. Rev. Stat. § 70-651.04

Date: Aug 25, 2025
Mandamus as the Tool to Correct PILOT Fund Misallocations: The Treasurer’s Ministerial Duty under Article VIII § 11 and Neb. Rev. Stat. § 70-651.04 Introduction In State ex rel. Douglas Cty. Sch....
“When the Water Shuts Off”: Due-Process Notice to Corporate Landowners and the Finality of Irrigated-Acre Reductions under Neb. Rev. Stat. §46-746(1) – A Commentary on State ex rel. Seeman v. Lower Republican NRD, 319 Neb. 681 (2025)

“When the Water Shuts Off”: Due-Process Notice to Corporate Landowners and the Finality of Irrigated-Acre Reductions under Neb. Rev. Stat. §46-746(1) – A Commentary on State ex rel. Seeman v. Lower Republican NRD, 319 Neb. 681 (2025)

Date: Aug 25, 2025
“When the Water Shuts Off”: Due-Process Notice to Corporate Landowners and the Finality of Irrigated-Acre Reductions under Neb. Rev. Stat. §46-746(1) A Comprehensive Commentary on State ex rel....
Cross-Border Equitable Contribution: Wyoming Endorses Florida’s 50/50 Presumption for Joint Mortgage Obligors – A Commentary on Katya Hutton v. Michael & J. Christopher Dykes (2025 WY 94)

Cross-Border Equitable Contribution: Wyoming Endorses Florida’s 50/50 Presumption for Joint Mortgage Obligors – A Commentary on Katya Hutton v. Michael & J. Christopher Dykes (2025 WY 94)

Date: Aug 25, 2025
Cross-Border Equitable Contribution: Wyoming Endorses Florida’s 50/50 Presumption for Joint Mortgage Obligors Commentary on Katya Hutton v. Michael L. Dykes & J. Christopher Dykes, Co-PRs of the...
“Timeliness and Prejudice” – The Third Circuit’s Refined Boundaries for Late Amendments, Rule 403, and Trial Discretion in Employment Discrimination Litigation

“Timeliness and Prejudice” – The Third Circuit’s Refined Boundaries for Late Amendments, Rule 403, and Trial Discretion in Employment Discrimination Litigation

Date: Aug 25, 2025
“Timeliness and Prejudice” – The Third Circuit’s Refined Boundaries for Late Amendments, Rule 403, and Trial Discretion in Employment Discrimination Litigation I. Introduction Case: Carl Williams v....
“Thrown a Lifeline”: Fifth Circuit Holds Marine Life-Rafts Are “Equipment” under the Texas Dealer Act

“Thrown a Lifeline”: Fifth Circuit Holds Marine Life-Rafts Are “Equipment” under the Texas Dealer Act

Date: Aug 25, 2025
“Thrown a Lifeline”: Fifth Circuit Holds Marine Life-Rafts Are “Equipment” under the Texas Dealer Act 1. Introduction In Fire Protection Service, Inc. v. Survitec Survival Products, Inc., No....
Clarifying Same-Sex Harassment Pleadings After Texas’s 2021 Amendments: A Commentary on Lanier v. Wise County (5th Cir. 2025)

Clarifying Same-Sex Harassment Pleadings After Texas’s 2021 Amendments: A Commentary on Lanier v. Wise County (5th Cir. 2025)

Date: Aug 25, 2025
Clarifying Same-Sex Harassment Pleadings After Texas’s 2021 Amendments: A Commentary on Lanier v. Wise County (5th Cir. 2025) 1. Introduction Chad Lewis Lanier, a retired deputy sheriff for Wise...
“Dual-Trigger” Disarmament after Bruen: Violence or Probation Status Suffices – A Commentary on United States v. Clark (5th Cir. 2025)

“Dual-Trigger” Disarmament after Bruen: Violence or Probation Status Suffices – A Commentary on United States v. Clark (5th Cir. 2025)

Date: Aug 25, 2025
“Dual-Trigger” Disarmament after Bruen: Violence or Probation Status Suffices – A Commentary on United States v. Clark (5th Cir. 2025) Introduction United States v. Clark, decided on 21 August 2025...
Rule 32(h) Notice through a Presentence Report and the Upholding of Significant Upward Departures – A Commentary on United States v. Ricky Artis (4th Cir., Aug. 21 2025)

Rule 32(h) Notice through a Presentence Report and the Upholding of Significant Upward Departures – A Commentary on United States v. Ricky Artis (4th Cir., Aug. 21 2025)

Date: Aug 25, 2025
Rule 32(h) Notice through a Presentence Report and the Upholding of Significant Upward Departures – A Commentary on United States v. Ricky Artis (4th Cir., Aug. 21 2025) 1. Introduction United States...
Possession Equals Exposure: Tenth Circuit Affirms Full-Scheme Forfeiture and Refines Rules on Co-Participant Pleas – Commentary on United States v. Cline (2025)

Possession Equals Exposure: Tenth Circuit Affirms Full-Scheme Forfeiture and Refines Rules on Co-Participant Pleas – Commentary on United States v. Cline (2025)

Date: Aug 25, 2025
Possession Equals Exposure: Tenth Circuit Affirms Full-Scheme Forfeiture and Refines Rules on Co-Participant Pleas – Commentary on United States v. Cline (2025) I. Introduction The Tenth Circuit’s...
United States v. Cline – The Tenth Circuit Endorses “Full-Scheme” Forfeiture and Clarifies the Reach of Honeycutt and Peterman

United States v. Cline – The Tenth Circuit Endorses “Full-Scheme” Forfeiture and Clarifies the Reach of Honeycutt and Peterman

Date: Aug 25, 2025
United States v. Cline – The Tenth Circuit Endorses “Full-Scheme” Forfeiture and Clarifies the Reach of Honeycutt and Peterman Introduction In United States v. Cline, Nos. 24-1119 & 24-1137 (10th...
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