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

view Case Commentaries

Ohio Supreme Court mandates facility‑specific “rate for direct care costs” drives 60% allocation to nursing‑home quality pool under R.C. 5165.26(E)

Ohio Supreme Court mandates facility‑specific “rate for direct care costs” drives 60% allocation to nursing‑home quality pool under R.C. 5165.26(E)

Date: Sep 4, 2025
Facility‑Specific “Rate for Direct Care Costs,” Not Group “Price,” Controls the 60% Quality‑Pool Allocation: A Textualist Course Correction in Medicaid Nursing‑Home Payments Case Overview Decision:...
Swearing-In Does Not Moot Eligibility Challenges; Election-Law Injunctions Must Satisfy Montana’s Four-Factor Test

Swearing-In Does Not Moot Eligibility Challenges; Election-Law Injunctions Must Satisfy Montana’s Four-Factor Test

Date: Sep 4, 2025
Swearing-In Does Not Moot Eligibility Challenges; Election-Law Injunctions Must Satisfy Montana’s Four-Factor Test Case: Bartel v. Middlestead, 2025 MT 195 (Mont. Sept. 2, 2025) Court: Supreme Court...
“Taxes Relating to the Property” in Liquidation MOUs: No Implied Duty to Reserve for a Debtor’s Capital Gains; Extrinsic Evidence Controls Before Contra Proferentem

“Taxes Relating to the Property” in Liquidation MOUs: No Implied Duty to Reserve for a Debtor’s Capital Gains; Extrinsic Evidence Controls Before Contra Proferentem

Date: Sep 4, 2025
“Taxes Relating to the Property” in Liquidation MOUs: No Implied Duty to Reserve for a Debtor’s Capital Gains; Extrinsic Evidence Controls Before Contra Proferentem Introduction Gabert v. Seaman,...
Johnson v. State Farm (Mont. 2025): Attorney Fees Are Part of “Made Whole,” But Only for Covered Losses; Coverage‑Segmented Subrogation Clarified

Johnson v. State Farm (Mont. 2025): Attorney Fees Are Part of “Made Whole,” But Only for Covered Losses; Coverage‑Segmented Subrogation Clarified

Date: Sep 4, 2025
Johnson v. State Farm (Mont. 2025): Attorney Fees Are Part of “Made Whole,” But Only for Covered Losses; Coverage‑Segmented Subrogation Clarified Introduction In Johnson v. State Farm Ins., 2025 MT...
Probable Cause Must Exist at the Moment of Seizure: Montana Supreme Court Clarifies the Line Between Extended Traffic Stops and Evidentiary Vehicle Seizures

Probable Cause Must Exist at the Moment of Seizure: Montana Supreme Court Clarifies the Line Between Extended Traffic Stops and Evidentiary Vehicle Seizures

Date: Sep 4, 2025
Probable Cause Must Exist at the Moment of Seizure: Montana Supreme Court Clarifies the Line Between Extended Traffic Stops and Evidentiary Vehicle Seizures Introduction In State v....
Plain and Cumulative Error Narrowly Applied; Isolated Doyle Reference Deemed Nonprejudicial; Mandatory Jail‑Time Credit Correction — Commentary on State v. Martinez (2025 MT 197N)

Plain and Cumulative Error Narrowly Applied; Isolated Doyle Reference Deemed Nonprejudicial; Mandatory Jail‑Time Credit Correction — Commentary on State v. Martinez (2025 MT 197N)

Date: Sep 4, 2025
Plain and Cumulative Error Narrowly Applied; Isolated Doyle Reference Deemed Nonprejudicial; Mandatory Jail‑Time Credit Correction — Commentary on State v. Martinez (2025 MT 197N) Introduction This...
Harmlessness of Replaying Testimonial Evidence Absent a “Particularized Need,” and Strict Prerequisites for Structural Error in Jury Selection — Commentary on State v. Purkhiser (Montana Supreme Court)

Harmlessness of Replaying Testimonial Evidence Absent a “Particularized Need,” and Strict Prerequisites for Structural Error in Jury Selection — Commentary on State v. Purkhiser (Montana Supreme Court)

Date: Sep 4, 2025
Harmlessness of Replaying Testimonial Evidence Absent a “Particularized Need,” and Strict Prerequisites for Structural Error in Jury Selection — Commentary on State v. Purkhiser (Montana Supreme...
Connecticut Adopts a Balancing Test for Prearrest Delay Under the State Due Process Clauses: Commentary on State v. McFarland (2025)

Connecticut Adopts a Balancing Test for Prearrest Delay Under the State Due Process Clauses: Commentary on State v. McFarland (2025)

Date: Sep 4, 2025
Connecticut Adopts a Balancing Test for Prearrest Delay Under the State Due Process Clauses: Commentary on State v. McFarland (2025) Introduction State v. McFarland is a landmark decision of the...
State v. McFarland: Connecticut Adopts a State Due Process Balancing Test for Pre‑Accusation Delay—Concurrence Urges Retaining Marion–Lovasco

State v. McFarland: Connecticut Adopts a State Due Process Balancing Test for Pre‑Accusation Delay—Concurrence Urges Retaining Marion–Lovasco

Date: Sep 4, 2025
State v. McFarland: Connecticut Adopts a State Due Process Balancing Test for Pre‑Accusation Delay—Concurrence Urges Retaining Marion–Lovasco Introduction In State v. McFarland (Conn. Sept. 2, 2025),...
Balancing, Not Bad Faith: Connecticut Adopts a Barker-Style Test for Prearrest Delay Due Process Claims

Balancing, Not Bad Faith: Connecticut Adopts a Barker-Style Test for Prearrest Delay Due Process Claims

Date: Sep 4, 2025
Balancing, Not Bad Faith: Connecticut Adopts a Barker-Style Test for Prearrest Delay Due Process Claims Introduction In State v. McFarland (Second Concurrence), Supreme Court of Connecticut (Sept. 2,...
Toward a Balancing Test for Prearrest Delay Under the Connecticut Constitution: Justice Alexander’s Concurrence in State v. McFarland

Toward a Balancing Test for Prearrest Delay Under the Connecticut Constitution: Justice Alexander’s Concurrence in State v. McFarland

Date: Sep 4, 2025
Toward a Balancing Test for Prearrest Delay Under the Connecticut Constitution: Justice Alexander’s Concurrence in State v. McFarland Introduction In State v. McFarland (Supreme Court of Connecticut,...
Cotenants’ Standing To Defend Absent Cotenants Against Adverse Possession, and Laches as a Bar to Century‑Old Land Court Claims: The Hawaiʻi Supreme Court’s Decision in In re Application of Pioneer Mill Co., Limited (2025)

Cotenants’ Standing To Defend Absent Cotenants Against Adverse Possession, and Laches as a Bar to Century‑Old Land Court Claims: The Hawaiʻi Supreme Court’s Decision in In re Application of Pioneer Mill Co., Limited (2025)

Date: Sep 4, 2025
“Equity Aids the Vigilant”: Cotenants May Defend Absent Cotenants Against Adverse Possession, and Laches Bars a Century-Old Land Court Claim Introduction In a published opinion with far-reaching...
Comparable-Sales Over Speculation: Eleventh Circuit Affirms 40% Penalty Where Tax Court’s Independent Valuation Makes Zoning and §6103 Disputes Irrelevant

Comparable-Sales Over Speculation: Eleventh Circuit Affirms 40% Penalty Where Tax Court’s Independent Valuation Makes Zoning and §6103 Disputes Irrelevant

Date: Sep 4, 2025
Comparable-Sales Over Speculation: Eleventh Circuit Affirms 40% Penalty Where Tax Court’s Independent Valuation Makes Zoning and §6103 Disputes Irrelevant Introduction In Buckelew Farm, LLC (f.k.a....
“Restoration Period” Includes Functional Replacement of Lost Data; Audit and Covenant‑Compliance Costs Qualify as Extra Expenses After Electronic Equipment Failure (2d Cir. Summary Order)

“Restoration Period” Includes Functional Replacement of Lost Data; Audit and Covenant‑Compliance Costs Qualify as Extra Expenses After Electronic Equipment Failure (2d Cir. Summary Order)

Date: Sep 4, 2025
“Restoration Period” Includes Functional Replacement of Lost Data; Audit and Covenant‑Compliance Costs Qualify as Extra Expenses After Electronic Equipment Failure (2d Cir. Summary Order) Case: Ariz....
No Placeholders on Form I-589: Second Circuit Upholds Abandonment for Lack of “Specific Substantive Answers,” Highlights Withholding/CAT Standards, and Flags Counsel Conduct

No Placeholders on Form I-589: Second Circuit Upholds Abandonment for Lack of “Specific Substantive Answers,” Highlights Withholding/CAT Standards, and Flags Counsel Conduct

Date: Sep 4, 2025
No Placeholders on Form I-589: Second Circuit Upholds Abandonment for Lack of “Specific Substantive Answers,” Highlights Withholding/CAT Standards, and Flags Counsel Conduct Introduction In...
Second Circuit Holds That Nonpayment of Arbitral Fees Mid‑Arbitration Is Not a “Refusal to Arbitrate” Under FAA § 4

Second Circuit Holds That Nonpayment of Arbitral Fees Mid‑Arbitration Is Not a “Refusal to Arbitrate” Under FAA § 4

Date: Sep 4, 2025
Second Circuit Holds That Nonpayment of Arbitral Fees Mid‑Arbitration Is Not a “Refusal to Arbitrate” Under FAA § 4 Introduction In Frazier v. X Corp., No. 24-1948 (2d Cir. Sept. 2, 2025), the U.S....
Eleventh Circuit Reaffirms: Post-Handcuff Strikes Constitute Gratuitous Force; Qualified Immunity Denied

Eleventh Circuit Reaffirms: Post-Handcuff Strikes Constitute Gratuitous Force; Qualified Immunity Denied

Date: Sep 4, 2025
Reaffirming the Limits of Force: No Qualified Immunity for Post-Handcuff Strikes on a Non-Resisting Suspect Case: Albert Lee St. Clair, Jr. v. DeAngelo M. Anthony, et al. (No. 24-11302) Court: U.S....
Reasoned Consideration and Evidentiary Sufficiency at the Reconsideration Stage: Preliminary Diagnoses and Generalized Violence Do Not Establish Prima Facie Relief

Reasoned Consideration and Evidentiary Sufficiency at the Reconsideration Stage: Preliminary Diagnoses and Generalized Violence Do Not Establish Prima Facie Relief

Date: Sep 4, 2025
Reasoned Consideration and Evidentiary Sufficiency at the Reconsideration Stage: Preliminary Diagnoses and Generalized Violence Do Not Establish Prima Facie Relief Introduction In Armando...
No Waiver Without Knowledge: Georgia’s Clear-and-Unmistakable Standard Governs Ownership Conditions in Temporary-Substitute Auto Coverage

No Waiver Without Knowledge: Georgia’s Clear-and-Unmistakable Standard Governs Ownership Conditions in Temporary-Substitute Auto Coverage

Date: Sep 4, 2025
No Waiver Without Knowledge: Georgia’s Clear-and-Unmistakable Standard Governs Ownership Conditions in Temporary-Substitute Auto Coverage Introduction The Eleventh Circuit’s unpublished decision in...
No Prejudice, No Penalty; Months-Long Gaps Break Causation: Eleventh Circuit Clarifies COBRA Penalty Discretion and Title VII Retaliation in Thibodeaux v. City of Atlanta

No Prejudice, No Penalty; Months-Long Gaps Break Causation: Eleventh Circuit Clarifies COBRA Penalty Discretion and Title VII Retaliation in Thibodeaux v. City of Atlanta

Date: Sep 4, 2025
No Prejudice, No Penalty; Months-Long Gaps Break Causation: Eleventh Circuit Clarifies COBRA Penalty Discretion and Title VII Retaliation in Thibodeaux v. City of Atlanta Introduction This commentary...
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