Log In
  • India
  • US
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)
  • Commentaries
    United Kingdom
    England and Wales
    Scotland
    Northern Ireland
    Ireland
Log In Sign Up UK Judgments
  • India
  • US

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

state Case Commentaries

“Partial Progress Is Not Enough” – Vermont Supreme Court Clarifies the Doctrine of Parental Stagnation and the “Reasonable-Time” Standard in Termination-of-Parental-Rights Cases

“Partial Progress Is Not Enough” – Vermont Supreme Court Clarifies the Doctrine of Parental Stagnation and the “Reasonable-Time” Standard in Termination-of-Parental-Rights Cases

Date: Aug 13, 2025
“Partial Progress Is Not Enough” – Vermont Supreme Court Clarifies the Doctrine of Parental Stagnation and the “Reasonable-Time” Standard in Termination-of-Parental-Rights Cases 1. Introduction In In...
Clarifying ICWA Inquiry Duties and Putative Fathers’ Due-Process Rights in Vermont – A Commentary on In re O.L., Juvenile (2025)

Clarifying ICWA Inquiry Duties and Putative Fathers’ Due-Process Rights in Vermont – A Commentary on In re O.L., Juvenile (2025)

Date: Aug 13, 2025
Clarifying ICWA Inquiry Duties and Putative Fathers’ Due-Process Rights in Vermont – A Commentary on In re O.L., Juvenile (Vt. 2025) Introduction The Vermont Supreme Court’s decision in In re O.L.,...
Twombly v. Horne: Reaffirming the Appellant’s Duty to Perfect the Record and the Automatic Writ of Possession under Vermont’s Rent-Escrow Statute

Twombly v. Horne: Reaffirming the Appellant’s Duty to Perfect the Record and the Automatic Writ of Possession under Vermont’s Rent-Escrow Statute

Date: Aug 13, 2025
Twombly v. Horne: Reaffirming the Appellant’s Duty to Perfect the Record and the Automatic Writ of Possession under Vermont’s Rent-Escrow Statute Introduction Oliver Twombly v. Marcia Horne, 2025 VT...
Limiting Perry: Vermont Supreme Court Holds That Due-Process Notice in Property-Tax Grievances Need Not Be Mailed to Counsel

Limiting Perry: Vermont Supreme Court Holds That Due-Process Notice in Property-Tax Grievances Need Not Be Mailed to Counsel

Date: Aug 13, 2025
Limiting Perry: Vermont Supreme Court Holds That Due-Process Notice in Property-Tax Grievances Need Not Be Mailed to Counsel Introduction Salisbury AD 1, LLC v. Town of Salisbury, 2025 VT 43,...
Voluntary Absence at Restitution Hearings Constitutes Waiver: Commentary on State v. Brittany L. Knight (Vt. 2025)

Voluntary Absence at Restitution Hearings Constitutes Waiver: Commentary on State v. Brittany L. Knight (Vt. 2025)

Date: Aug 13, 2025
Voluntary Absence at Restitution Hearings Constitutes Waiver: An In-Depth Commentary on State v. Brittany L. Knight, Supreme Court of Vermont (2025) I. Introduction Background: Brittany L. Knight...
Clarifying the Bailey Balancing Test: Negligent Evidence Destruction without Gross Negligence Is Insufficient for Dismissal in Vermont

Clarifying the Bailey Balancing Test: Negligent Evidence Destruction without Gross Negligence Is Insufficient for Dismissal in Vermont

Date: Aug 13, 2025
Clarifying the Bailey Balancing Test: Negligent Evidence Destruction without Gross Negligence Is Insufficient for Dismissal in Vermont Introduction State v. Eric M. Champagne, decided by the Vermont...
State v. Burket: Refining Plain-Error Review of Jury Instructions and Narrowing Drug-Testing Conditions in Vermont Probation Law

State v. Burket: Refining Plain-Error Review of Jury Instructions and Narrowing Drug-Testing Conditions in Vermont Probation Law

Date: Aug 13, 2025
State v. Burket: Refining Plain-Error Review of Jury Instructions and Narrowing Drug-Testing Conditions in Vermont Probation Law 1. Introduction In State v. Kelly Burket, 2025 VT ___ (Aug. 8, 2025),...
Parties’ Agreed Life-Insurance Obligations Survive Beyond Death – A Commentary on diMonda v. Lincoln National Corp., 2025 VT 45

Parties’ Agreed Life-Insurance Obligations Survive Beyond Death – A Commentary on diMonda v. Lincoln National Corp., 2025 VT 45

Date: Aug 13, 2025
Parties’ Agreed Life-Insurance Obligations Survive Beyond Death – The Vermont Supreme Court Reconciles Postmortem Maintenance Restrictions with Contractual Autonomy Commentary on Victoria diMonda v....
Ricker v. Nebraska Methodist – Solidifying Nebraska Courts’ Inherent Power to Exclude Late-Disclosed Experts

Ricker v. Nebraska Methodist – Solidifying Nebraska Courts’ Inherent Power to Exclude Late-Disclosed Experts

Date: Aug 13, 2025
Ricker v. Nebraska Methodist Health System, Inc. Affirming Courts’ Inherent Authority to Enforce Progression Orders by Excluding Late-Disclosed Expert Testimony 1. Introduction The Supreme Court of...
Extending Laches to Declaratory Quiet-Title Actions and Recognising Non-Party Prejudice: Commentary on Amerigold Holdings LLC v. Baker & Silverbow Mining LLC (Alaska 2025)

Extending Laches to Declaratory Quiet-Title Actions and Recognising Non-Party Prejudice: Commentary on Amerigold Holdings LLC v. Baker & Silverbow Mining LLC (Alaska 2025)

Date: Aug 13, 2025
Extending Laches to Declaratory Quiet-Title Actions and Recognising Non-Party Prejudice A Commentary on Amerigold Holdings LLC v. Douglas Baker & Silverbow Mining LLC, Supreme Court of Alaska,...
Explained: The New Obligation on Alaska Courts to Justify
            Non-Insurance Solutions When Survivor Benefits Are Jeopardized —
            A Commentary on Sandvik v. Frazier (Alaska 2025)

Explained: The New Obligation on Alaska Courts to Justify Non-Insurance Solutions When Survivor Benefits Are Jeopardized — A Commentary on Sandvik v. Frazier (Alaska 2025)

Date: Aug 13, 2025
Explained: The New Obligation on Alaska Courts to Justify Non-Insurance Solutions When Survivor Benefits Are Jeopardized — A Commentary on Sandvik v. Frazier (Alaska 2025) 1. Introduction Background....
“Consult First, Act Later” – Wisconsin Affirms the Attorney’s Duty to Communicate Directly with Adjudged-Incompetent Clients (Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Thomas L. Frenn, 2025)

“Consult First, Act Later” – Wisconsin Affirms the Attorney’s Duty to Communicate Directly with Adjudged-Incompetent Clients (Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Thomas L. Frenn, 2025)

Date: Aug 13, 2025
“Consult First, Act Later” – Wisconsin Affirms the Attorney’s Duty to Communicate Directly with Adjudged-Incompetent Clients (Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Thomas L. Frenn, 2025 WI ___) Introduction...
A Cab v. Murray: Nevada Supreme Court Confirms District Courts’ Authority to Award Appellate Attorney Fees under the Minimum Wage Amendment

A Cab v. Murray: Nevada Supreme Court Confirms District Courts’ Authority to Award Appellate Attorney Fees under the Minimum Wage Amendment

Date: Aug 13, 2025
A Cab v. Murray: Nevada Supreme Court Confirms District Courts’ Authority to Award Appellate Attorney Fees under the Minimum Wage Amendment Introduction In A Cab Series, LLC f/k/a A Cab, LLC v....
“Beyond the Sirens” – Armenta v. Unified Fire (2025) and the Narrowing of the UGIA’s “Emergency Medical Assistance” Immunity

“Beyond the Sirens” – Armenta v. Unified Fire (2025) and the Narrowing of the UGIA’s “Emergency Medical Assistance” Immunity

Date: Aug 13, 2025
“Beyond the Sirens” – Armenta v. Unified Fire (2025) and the Narrowing of the UGIA’s “Emergency Medical Assistance” Immunity Supreme Court of Utah – 2025 UT 26 – Decided 7 Aug 2025 1. Introduction In...
Utah Supreme Court Affirms Surface Owner’s Right to Uncompensated On-Site Use of Soil in Severed Estates — Comment on Genesis Aggregates B v. Toll Southwest (2025 UT 28)

Utah Supreme Court Affirms Surface Owner’s Right to Uncompensated On-Site Use of Soil in Severed Estates — Comment on Genesis Aggregates B v. Toll Southwest (2025 UT 28)

Date: Aug 13, 2025
Utah Supreme Court Affirms Surface Owner’s Right to Uncompensated On-Site Use of Soil in Severed Estates Commentary on Genesis Aggregates B v. Toll Southwest, 2025 UT 28 Introduction Genesis...
Municipal Incorporation and the Doctrine of Mootness in Land-Use Referendum Litigation: Commentary on Haney v. Tooele County (2025 UT 30)

Municipal Incorporation and the Doctrine of Mootness in Land-Use Referendum Litigation: Commentary on Haney v. Tooele County (2025 UT 30)

Date: Aug 13, 2025
Municipal Incorporation and the Doctrine of Mootness in Land-Use Referendum Litigation: A Comprehensive Commentary on Haney v. Tooele County, 2025 UT 30 1. Introduction Haney v. Tooele County (2025...
Flexible Deference to Bar Admissions Decisions: The Utah Supreme Court’s Refined Standard of Review in Long v. Utah State Bar

Flexible Deference to Bar Admissions Decisions: The Utah Supreme Court’s Refined Standard of Review in Long v. Utah State Bar

Date: Aug 13, 2025
“Flexible Deference” to Bar Admissions Decisions: The Utah Supreme Court’s Refined Standard of Review in Long v. Utah State Bar (2025 UT 29) Introduction Case name: Long v. Utah State Bar, 2025 UT 29...
The “Federal-Origin Exception” to Utah’s EIDPA Suppression Rule – A Comprehensive Commentary on State v. Andrus (2025 UT 32)

The “Federal-Origin Exception” to Utah’s EIDPA Suppression Rule – A Comprehensive Commentary on State v. Andrus (2025 UT 32)

Date: Aug 13, 2025
The “Federal-Origin Exception” to Utah’s EIDPA Suppression Rule In-Depth Commentary on State v. Andrus, 2025 UT 32 (Supreme Court of Utah) 1. Introduction State v. Andrus presented Utah’s high court...
Objective Imminence as a Law-Like Mixed Question: Correctness Review of Pre-Trial Justification Rulings in Utah

Objective Imminence as a Law-Like Mixed Question: Correctness Review of Pre-Trial Justification Rulings in Utah

Date: Aug 13, 2025
Objective Imminence as a Law-Like Mixed Question: Correctness Review of Pre-Trial Justification Rulings in Utah 1. Introduction State v. Wilcox, 2025 UT 31, is the Utah Supreme Court’s first...
Talisker v. Midtown Acquisitions: Utah Supreme Court Validates Broad Contractual Waivers of Rule 69B Sheriff’s-Sale Protections

Talisker v. Midtown Acquisitions: Utah Supreme Court Validates Broad Contractual Waivers of Rule 69B Sheriff’s-Sale Protections

Date: Aug 13, 2025
Talisker v. Midtown Acquisitions: Utah Supreme Court Validates Broad Contractual Waivers of Rule 69B Sheriff’s-Sale Protections Introduction Talisker Partnership and a constellation of related...
Previous   Next
CaseMine Logo

Know us better!

  • Request a Demo

Company

  • About Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie 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

© 2023 Gauge Data Solutions Pvt. Ltd.

Summary

Alert

We use cookies to improve your experience

You can accept all cookies or turn off analytical ones.