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

state Case Commentaries

Proposed Rule: Admit Showup Identifications Only in “True Exigencies” Where a Showup Is the Only Feasible Procedure

Proposed Rule: Admit Showup Identifications Only in “True Exigencies” Where a Showup Is the Only Feasible Procedure

Date: Jul 23, 2025
Proposed Rule: Admit Showup Identifications Only in “True Exigencies” Where a Showup Is the Only Feasible Procedure Case: State v. McLaurin (Dissent) Court: Supreme Court of Connecticut Date:...
Amendment 3 Expungement: “Marijuana Offense” Excludes Firearm-While-Possessing-Felony-Marijuana (Conduct that Endangers Others)

Amendment 3 Expungement: “Marijuana Offense” Excludes Firearm-While-Possessing-Felony-Marijuana (Conduct that Endangers Others)

Date: Jul 23, 2025
Amendment 3 Expungement: “Marijuana Offense” Excludes Firearm-While-Possessing-Felony-Marijuana (Conduct that Endangers Others) Case: C.S. v. Missouri State Highway Patrol Criminal Justice...

        Tisinger v. State: Delaware Supreme Court Re-Affirms the “Bench-Trial Hearsay Presumption” 
        and Refines Brady Disclosure Duties Where Prejudice Is Absent

Tisinger v. State: Delaware Supreme Court Re-Affirms the “Bench-Trial Hearsay Presumption” and Refines Brady Disclosure Duties Where Prejudice Is Absent

Date: Jul 23, 2025
Tisinger v. State: Delaware Supreme Court Re-Affirms the “Bench-Trial Hearsay Presumption” and Refines Brady Disclosure Duties Where Prejudice Is Absent Introduction Dominique Tisinger appealed his...
Unequivocal Abandonment of Termination in Texas Parental-Rights Cases: Commentary on D.V. v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services

Unequivocal Abandonment of Termination in Texas Parental-Rights Cases: Commentary on D.V. v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services

Date: Jul 23, 2025
Unequivocal Abandonment of Termination in Texas Parental-Rights Cases Commentary on D.V. v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services, Supreme Court of Texas (Oct. 31, 2025) I. Introduction...
Unappointed Counsel Cannot Trigger Rule 29.15 “Abandonment” to Excuse Untimely Amended Motions; No Remand When Sole Timely Pro Se Claim Was Already Decided on Direct Appeal

Unappointed Counsel Cannot Trigger Rule 29.15 “Abandonment” to Excuse Untimely Amended Motions; No Remand When Sole Timely Pro Se Claim Was Already Decided on Direct Appeal

Date: Jul 23, 2025
Unappointed Counsel Cannot Trigger Rule 29.15 “Abandonment” to Excuse Untimely Amended Motions; No Remand When Sole Timely Pro Se Claim Was Already Decided on Direct Appeal 1. Introduction Mack v....
Sentencing-Date Version of Rule 29.15 Governs; Abandonment Doctrine Limited to Appointed Postconviction Counsel

Sentencing-Date Version of Rule 29.15 Governs; Abandonment Doctrine Limited to Appointed Postconviction Counsel

Date: Jul 23, 2025
Sentencing-Date Version of Rule 29.15 Governs; Abandonment Doctrine Limited to Appointed Postconviction Counsel 1. Introduction In Scott v. State (Supreme Court of Missouri, July 22, 2025), the Court...
Unmistakable Postconviction Counsel Abandonment: No Remand Required When the Record Shows Untimely Amended Motions and the Merits Were Already Litigated

Unmistakable Postconviction Counsel Abandonment: No Remand Required When the Record Shows Untimely Amended Motions and the Merits Were Already Litigated

Date: Jul 23, 2025
Unmistakable Postconviction Counsel Abandonment: No Remand Required When the Record Shows Untimely Amended Motions and the Merits Were Already Litigated 1. Introduction Nelson v. State (Mo. banc July...
Exclusive Local 3% Adult-Use Marijuana Tax Authority Under Mo. Const. art. XIV, § 2: City in Incorporated Areas, County Only in Unincorporated Areas

Exclusive Local 3% Adult-Use Marijuana Tax Authority Under Mo. Const. art. XIV, § 2: City in Incorporated Areas, County Only in Unincorporated Areas

Date: Jul 23, 2025
Exclusive Local 3% Adult-Use Marijuana Tax Authority Under Mo. Const. art. XIV, § 2: City in Incorporated Areas, County Only in Unincorporated Areas Case: Robust Missouri Dispensary 3, LLC v. St....
Reliability as the Decisive Safeguard: Connecticut Upholds a Showup Identification Even Assuming Unnecessary Suggestiveness (State v. McLaurin)

Reliability as the Decisive Safeguard: Connecticut Upholds a Showup Identification Even Assuming Unnecessary Suggestiveness (State v. McLaurin)

Date: Jul 23, 2025
Reliability as the Decisive Safeguard: Connecticut Upholds a Showup Identification Even Assuming Unnecessary Suggestiveness Introduction In State v. McLaurin (officially released July 22, 2025), the...
State v. Bolton: Neutral Handling of Juror Dissent During a Practice Book § 42-31 Jury Poll; No Per Se Need for a Chip Smith Charge

State v. Bolton: Neutral Handling of Juror Dissent During a Practice Book § 42-31 Jury Poll; No Per Se Need for a Chip Smith Charge

Date: Jul 23, 2025
State v. Bolton: Neutral Handling of Juror Dissent During a Practice Book § 42-31 Jury Poll; No Per Se Need for a Chip Smith Charge I. Introduction State v. Bolton (Supreme Court of Connecticut,...
Reasonable Necessity Persists Under New Hampshire’s Stand‑Your‑Ground Law; Mere Non‑Recovery of a Weapon Cannot Sustain Falsifying‑Evidence Convictions — Commentary on State v. Harris, 2025 N.H. 32

Reasonable Necessity Persists Under New Hampshire’s Stand‑Your‑Ground Law; Mere Non‑Recovery of a Weapon Cannot Sustain Falsifying‑Evidence Convictions — Commentary on State v. Harris, 2025 N.H. 32

Date: Jul 23, 2025
Reasonable Necessity Persists Under New Hampshire’s Stand‑Your‑Ground Law; Mere Non‑Recovery of a Weapon Cannot Sustain Falsifying‑Evidence Convictions Commentary on State v. Harris, 2025 N.H. 32...
Attorney “Whistleblowing” Does Not Excuse Former-Client Confidentiality: Sunshine Law, Rule 4-1.13, and the First Amendment Are Not Safe Harbors

Attorney “Whistleblowing” Does Not Excuse Former-Client Confidentiality: Sunshine Law, Rule 4-1.13, and the First Amendment Are Not Safe Harbors

Date: Jul 23, 2025
Attorney “Whistleblowing” Does Not Excuse Former-Client Confidentiality: Sunshine Law, Rule 4-1.13, and the First Amendment Are Not Safe Harbors Case: In re: Ryan Christopher McCarty, Respondent....
From Silence to Scienter: Michigan Supreme Court Requires Mens Rea for Prisoner-in-Possession Offences Under MCL 8.9

From Silence to Scienter: Michigan Supreme Court Requires Mens Rea for Prisoner-in-Possession Offences Under MCL 8.9

Date: Jul 22, 2025
From Silence to Scienter: Michigan Supreme Court Requires Mens Rea for Prisoner-in-Possession Offences Under MCL 8.9 1. Introduction In People of the State of Michigan v. Christopher Lehman...
Jackson v. KA-3 Associates, LLC: Oregon Supreme Court Affirms Landlord Duty to Maintain Common Areas Under ORS 90.320(1)

Jackson v. KA-3 Associates, LLC: Oregon Supreme Court Affirms Landlord Duty to Maintain Common Areas Under ORS 90.320(1)

Date: Jul 22, 2025
Jackson v. KA-3 Associates, LLC: Extending Oregon Landlord Habitability Obligations to Common Areas Under ORS 90.320(1) Introduction Citation: Jackson v. KA-3 Associates, LLC, 374 Or 1 (2025),...
Implicit Nondisparagement Clauses Do Not Waive Oregon’s Anti-SLAPP Protections – A Commentary on Lowes v. Thompson, 374 Or 23 (2025)

Implicit Nondisparagement Clauses Do Not Waive Oregon’s Anti-SLAPP Protections – A Commentary on Lowes v. Thompson, 374 Or 23 (2025)

Date: Jul 22, 2025
Implicit Nondisparagement Clauses Do Not Waive Oregon’s Anti-SLAPP Protections A Comprehensive Commentary on Lowes v. Thompson, 374 Or 23 (2025) 1. Introduction Lowes v. Thompson is the Oregon...
“The Registered-Owner Inference Rule” – A New Article I, § 9 Benchmark after State v. Betancourt (2025)

“The Registered-Owner Inference Rule” – A New Article I, § 9 Benchmark after State v. Betancourt (2025)

Date: Jul 22, 2025
“The Registered-Owner Inference Rule” – A New Article I, § 9 Benchmark after State v. Betancourt (2025) 1. Introduction The Supreme Court of Oregon’s en banc decision in State v. Betancourt, 374 Or...
The Supremacy of the Equal Protection Clause over Florida’s Non-Diminishment Mandate

The Supremacy of the Equal Protection Clause over Florida’s Non-Diminishment Mandate

Date: Jul 22, 2025
The Supremacy of the Equal Protection Clause over Florida’s Non-Diminishment Mandate: A Commentary on Black Voters Matter Capacity Building Institute, Inc. v. Secretary, Florida Department of State...
Williams v. State of Florida: No Constitutional Right to a Court-Appointed Mitigation Specialist for Pro Se Capital Defendants

Williams v. State of Florida: No Constitutional Right to a Court-Appointed Mitigation Specialist for Pro Se Capital Defendants

Date: Jul 22, 2025
Williams v. State of Florida: No Constitutional Right to a Court-Appointed Mitigation Specialist for Pro Se Capital Defendants Introduction In Donald Otis Williams v. State of Florida...
“Deference with Reasoned Explanation” — The Florida Supreme Court’s New Framework for Reviewing Public Service Commission Settlements

“Deference with Reasoned Explanation” — The Florida Supreme Court’s New Framework for Reviewing Public Service Commission Settlements

Date: Jul 22, 2025
“Deference with Reasoned Explanation” — The Florida Supreme Court’s New Framework for Reviewing Public Service Commission Settlements Introduction Florida Rising, Inc. v. Florida Public Service...
“Speak Now or Forever Hold Your Peace” – The Florida Supreme Court Declares Case (Procedural) Jurisdiction Waivable in JJJTB, Inc. v. Schmidt

“Speak Now or Forever Hold Your Peace” – The Florida Supreme Court Declares Case (Procedural) Jurisdiction Waivable in JJJTB, Inc. v. Schmidt

Date: Jul 22, 2025
“Speak Now or Forever Hold Your Peace” – The Florida Supreme Court Declares Case (Procedural) Jurisdiction Waivable in JJJTB, Inc. v. Schmidt 1. Introduction On 17 July 2025, the Supreme Court of...
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