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

restricting-& Case Commentaries

Silence Is Admission: Georgia High Court Reaffirms Presumptive Disbarment for Knowing Client Abandonment and Non‑Cooperation, with Restitution as a Readmission Prerequisite

Silence Is Admission: Georgia High Court Reaffirms Presumptive Disbarment for Knowing Client Abandonment and Non‑Cooperation, with Restitution as a Readmission Prerequisite

Date: Nov 7, 2025
Silence Is Admission: Georgia High Court Reaffirms Presumptive Disbarment for Knowing Client Abandonment and Non‑Cooperation, with Restitution as a Readmission Prerequisite Court: Supreme Court of...
Merits-First Discipline: Georgia Supreme Court Holds It an Abuse of Discretion to Enter Default When a Timely Answer Was Misfiled but Promptly Corrected

Merits-First Discipline: Georgia Supreme Court Holds It an Abuse of Discretion to Enter Default When a Timely Answer Was Misfiled but Promptly Corrected

Date: Nov 7, 2025
Merits-First Discipline: Georgia Supreme Court Holds It an Abuse of Discretion to Enter Default When a Timely Answer Was Misfiled but Promptly Corrected Case: In the Matter of Herald J.A. Alexander,...
Merritt v. State: Georgia Supreme Court reinforces preservation requirements for shackling and Brady claims and upholds strategic non‑objection under Strickland

Merritt v. State: Georgia Supreme Court reinforces preservation requirements for shackling and Brady claims and upholds strategic non‑objection under Strickland

Date: Nov 7, 2025
Merritt v. State: Georgia Supreme Court reinforces preservation requirements for shackling and Brady claims and upholds strategic non‑objection under Strickland Introduction In Merritt v. State,...
Stitts v. State: No Plain Error in Omitting Accomplice-Corroboration Instruction Where Independent Evidence Strongly Implicates the Accused

Stitts v. State: No Plain Error in Omitting Accomplice-Corroboration Instruction Where Independent Evidence Strongly Implicates the Accused

Date: Nov 7, 2025
Stitts v. State: No Plain Error in Omitting Accomplice-Corroboration Instruction Where Independent Evidence Strongly Implicates the Accused Introduction In Stitts v. State, decided November 4, 2025,...
Comparative Negligence in Jail-Custody Cases: Estate of Mabee v. Wheatland County Confirms “Special Circumstances” as the Exception

Comparative Negligence in Jail-Custody Cases: Estate of Mabee v. Wheatland County Confirms “Special Circumstances” as the Exception

Date: Nov 7, 2025
Comparative Negligence in Jail-Custody Cases: Estate of Mabee v. Wheatland County Confirms “Special Circumstances” as the Exception Introduction In Estate of Mabee v. Wheatland County, 2025 MT 252,...
“Illusion of Choice” and Strict Compliance in Montana Civil Commitments: No Waiver of the Five‑Day Hearing or Qualified Evaluation Requirements Absent Knowing, Voluntary Consent (Matter of J.L.O.)

“Illusion of Choice” and Strict Compliance in Montana Civil Commitments: No Waiver of the Five‑Day Hearing or Qualified Evaluation Requirements Absent Knowing, Voluntary Consent (Matter of J.L.O.)

Date: Nov 7, 2025
“Illusion of Choice” and Strict Compliance in Montana Civil Commitments: No Waiver of the Five‑Day Hearing or Qualified Evaluation Requirements Absent Knowing, Voluntary Consent Introduction In...
Broad Titles, Liberal Construction: “Vaccination Status” Encompasses EUA/Trial‑Vaccine Mandate Bans Under Montana’s Article V, § 11(3)

Broad Titles, Liberal Construction: “Vaccination Status” Encompasses EUA/Trial‑Vaccine Mandate Bans Under Montana’s Article V, § 11(3)

Date: Nov 7, 2025
Broad Titles, Liberal Construction: “Vaccination Status” Encompasses EUA/Trial‑Vaccine Mandate Bans Under Montana’s Article V, § 11(3) Introduction In Netzer, Krautter & Brown, P.C. and Donald L....
Experts Are Not Automatically Exempt from Sequestration; Presumption of Vindictiveness Bars Increased Sentences Based on Appeal or Lack of Remorse — Commentary on State v. Grimshaw, 2025 MT 250

Experts Are Not Automatically Exempt from Sequestration; Presumption of Vindictiveness Bars Increased Sentences Based on Appeal or Lack of Remorse — Commentary on State v. Grimshaw, 2025 MT 250

Date: Nov 7, 2025
Experts Are Not Automatically Exempt from Sequestration; Presumption of Vindictiveness Bars Increased Sentences Based on Appeal or Lack of Remorse — Commentary on State v. Grimshaw, 2025 MT 250 Case:...
Resentencing Required When a District Court Exceeds the Statutory Maximum—Even with a Fully Suspended Term (State v. S. Foster, 2025 MT 255N)

Resentencing Required When a District Court Exceeds the Statutory Maximum—Even with a Fully Suspended Term (State v. S. Foster, 2025 MT 255N)

Date: Nov 7, 2025
Resentencing Required When a District Court Exceeds the Statutory Maximum—Even with a Fully Suspended Term (State v. S. Foster, 2025 MT 255N) Court: Supreme Court of Montana Date: November 4, 2025...
State v. Ellis: Open-Driveway Encounters—No Search When Evidence Is Voluntarily Produced, and Miranda Not Required During Noncustodial Driveway Questioning

State v. Ellis: Open-Driveway Encounters—No Search When Evidence Is Voluntarily Produced, and Miranda Not Required During Noncustodial Driveway Questioning

Date: Nov 7, 2025
State v. Ellis: Open-Driveway Encounters—No Search When Evidence Is Voluntarily Produced, and Miranda Not Required During Noncustodial Driveway Questioning Introduction In State v. Z. Ellis, 2025 MT...
Closing the Oglesby Loop and Limiting FOIA’s Law-Enforcement Exemptions: Third Circuit Bars “Federalization” of State Task Forces and Narrows 7(D) and 7(E) in Viola v. DOJ

Closing the Oglesby Loop and Limiting FOIA’s Law-Enforcement Exemptions: Third Circuit Bars “Federalization” of State Task Forces and Narrows 7(D) and 7(E) in Viola v. DOJ

Date: Nov 7, 2025
Closing the Oglesby Loop and Limiting FOIA’s Law-Enforcement Exemptions: Third Circuit Bars “Federalization” of State Task Forces and Narrows 7(D) and 7(E) in Viola v. DOJ Introduction In a...
Closing the Oglesby Loop and Recalibrating FOIA Proof: Third Circuit Tightens Exemption 7(D) and 7(E), Sets a Trial‑Exhibit Disclosure Presumption, and Limits FOIA’s Reach Over State Task Forces

Closing the Oglesby Loop and Recalibrating FOIA Proof: Third Circuit Tightens Exemption 7(D) and 7(E), Sets a Trial‑Exhibit Disclosure Presumption, and Limits FOIA’s Reach Over State Task Forces

Date: Nov 7, 2025
Closing the Oglesby Loop and Recalibrating FOIA Proof: Third Circuit Tightens Exemption 7(D) and 7(E), Sets a Trial‑Exhibit Disclosure Presumption, and Limits FOIA’s Reach Over State Task Forces...
Legislative Privilege Is Personal: Fifth Circuit Dismisses Appeal and Clarifies Conjunctive Test for Non‑Party Appellate Standing

Legislative Privilege Is Personal: Fifth Circuit Dismisses Appeal and Clarifies Conjunctive Test for Non‑Party Appellate Standing

Date: Nov 7, 2025
Legislative Privilege Is Personal: Fifth Circuit Dismisses Appeal and Clarifies Conjunctive Test for Non‑Party Appellate Standing Introduction In Arnold v. Barbers Hill Independent School District,...
When Rule 15, Not Rule 16, Governs Leave to Amend—and Why IRF Preadmission “Process” Allegations Don’t State FCA Fraud: Commentary on Gentry v. Encompass Health

When Rule 15, Not Rule 16, Governs Leave to Amend—and Why IRF Preadmission “Process” Allegations Don’t State FCA Fraud: Commentary on Gentry v. Encompass Health

Date: Nov 7, 2025
When Rule 15, Not Rule 16, Governs Leave to Amend—and Why IRF Preadmission “Process” Allegations Don’t State FCA Fraud: Commentary on Gentry v. Encompass Health Introduction This Fifth Circuit...
Post-Termination Return Trumps Qualified Persons: Fifth Circuit Clarifies Protective Orders Permit Return of Protected Information to the Producing Party’s Counsel

Post-Termination Return Trumps Qualified Persons: Fifth Circuit Clarifies Protective Orders Permit Return of Protected Information to the Producing Party’s Counsel

Date: Nov 7, 2025
Post-Termination Return Trumps Qualified Persons: Fifth Circuit Clarifies Protective Orders Permit Return of Protected Information to the Producing Party’s Counsel Introduction This consolidated...
Specific Post‑Termination Return Clauses Control: Fifth Circuit Clarifies That Protective Orders Do Not Bar Returning Protected Material to the Producing Party

Specific Post‑Termination Return Clauses Control: Fifth Circuit Clarifies That Protective Orders Do Not Bar Returning Protected Material to the Producing Party

Date: Nov 7, 2025
Specific Post‑Termination Return Clauses Control: Fifth Circuit Clarifies That Protective Orders Do Not Bar Returning Protected Material to the Producing Party Introduction In Ocwen Loan Servicing,...
Disclaimers Don’t Cure a Breach: Fifth Circuit Holds That Prosecutorial Advocacy for an Above‑Guidelines Sentence Violates a Plea Agreement Even Without a Formal Variance Request

Disclaimers Don’t Cure a Breach: Fifth Circuit Holds That Prosecutorial Advocacy for an Above‑Guidelines Sentence Violates a Plea Agreement Even Without a Formal Variance Request

Date: Nov 7, 2025
Disclaimers Don’t Cure a Breach: Fifth Circuit Holds That Prosecutorial Advocacy for an Above‑Guidelines Sentence Violates a Plea Agreement Even Without a Formal Variance Request Introduction In...
Presentment Is Jurisdictional and Dismissal Must Be Without Prejudice: The Fifth Circuit’s FTCA Clarification and Strict Limitations Enforcement in Williams v. United States

Presentment Is Jurisdictional and Dismissal Must Be Without Prejudice: The Fifth Circuit’s FTCA Clarification and Strict Limitations Enforcement in Williams v. United States

Date: Nov 7, 2025
Presentment Is Jurisdictional and Dismissal Must Be Without Prejudice: The Fifth Circuit’s FTCA Clarification and Strict Limitations Enforcement in Williams v. United States Introduction In Williams...
Rule 33 Is Not § 2255: Sixth Circuit Requires a “Modicum of Evidence” for New‑Trial Evidentiary Hearings and Reaffirms the “Foolishness” Deliberate‑Ignorance Instruction After Ruan

Rule 33 Is Not § 2255: Sixth Circuit Requires a “Modicum of Evidence” for New‑Trial Evidentiary Hearings and Reaffirms the “Foolishness” Deliberate‑Ignorance Instruction After Ruan

Date: Nov 5, 2025
Rule 33 Is Not § 2255: Sixth Circuit Requires a “Modicum of Evidence” for New‑Trial Evidentiary Hearings and Reaffirms the “Foolishness” Deliberate‑Ignorance Instruction After Ruan Case: United...
Res judicata reaffirmed: Second Circuit bars fourth federal suit challenging NYC Campaign Finance Board clawback and cautions vexatious filers with potential leave‑to‑file sanctions

Res judicata reaffirmed: Second Circuit bars fourth federal suit challenging NYC Campaign Finance Board clawback and cautions vexatious filers with potential leave‑to‑file sanctions

Date: Nov 5, 2025
Res judicata reaffirmed: Second Circuit bars fourth federal suit challenging NYC Campaign Finance Board clawback and cautions vexatious filers with potential leave‑to‑file sanctions Introduction In a...
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