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

Virginia Case Commentaries

Fees-on-Fees Are Not Automatic: Trial Courts May Deny Post-Settlement Fee-Litigation Time as Unreasonable Under Fee-Shifting Statutes

Fees-on-Fees Are Not Automatic: Trial Courts May Deny Post-Settlement Fee-Litigation Time as Unreasonable Under Fee-Shifting Statutes

Date: Apr 24, 2026
Fees-on-Fees Are Not Automatic: Trial Courts May Deny Post-Settlement Fee-Litigation Time as Unreasonable Under Fee-Shifting Statutes 1. Introduction Butcher v. General R.V. Center, Inc. (Va. Apr....
Edwards Is Not a Permanent Taint: Post-Invocation Statements Are Admissible After Interrogation Ends, the Suspect Reinitiates, and a Knowing Waiver Follows

Edwards Is Not a Permanent Taint: Post-Invocation Statements Are Admissible After Interrogation Ends, the Suspect Reinitiates, and a Knowing Waiver Follows

Date: Apr 24, 2026
Edwards Is Not a Permanent Taint: Post-Invocation Statements Are Admissible After Interrogation Ends, the Suspect Reinitiates, and a Knowing Waiver Follows I. Introduction Commonwealth v. Fayne...
Commonwealth v. Richerson — Totality-of-the-Evidence Controls DUI Sufficiency; Appellate Courts May Not Reweigh Body-Cam “Inconsistencies” or Invent Innocent Hypotheses

Commonwealth v. Richerson — Totality-of-the-Evidence Controls DUI Sufficiency; Appellate Courts May Not Reweigh Body-Cam “Inconsistencies” or Invent Innocent Hypotheses

Date: Apr 24, 2026
Commonwealth v. Richerson: Totality-of-the-Evidence Controls DUI Sufficiency; Appellate Courts May Not Reweigh Body-Cam “Inconsistencies” or Invent Innocent Hypotheses 1. Introduction In Commonwealth...
Near-Fatal Overdose as “Physical Illness or Other Cause” Rendering an Adult “Vulnerable” Under Code § 18.2-369(C)

Near-Fatal Overdose as “Physical Illness or Other Cause” Rendering an Adult “Vulnerable” Under Code § 18.2-369(C)

Date: Apr 24, 2026
Near-Fatal Overdose as “Physical Illness or Other Cause” Rendering an Adult “Vulnerable” Under Code § 18.2-369(C) 1. Introduction In Fergeson v. Commonwealth (ORDER) (Va. Apr. 23, 2026), the Supreme...
Code § 19.2-56(B) Applies as a Unified “Place of Abode” Rule: Copy-of-Warrant/Affidavit Duty Does Not Extend to Commercial Searches

Code § 19.2-56(B) Applies as a Unified “Place of Abode” Rule: Copy-of-Warrant/Affidavit Duty Does Not Extend to Commercial Searches

Date: Apr 20, 2026
Code § 19.2-56(B) Applies as a Unified “Place of Abode” Rule: Copy-of-Warrant/Affidavit Duty Does Not Extend to Commercial Searches 1. Introduction Case: Blow v. Commonwealth (Supreme Court of...
Traffic-Stop “Mission” Includes Scene Control When Driver Cannot Lawfully Depart: Brief Drug/Weapon Questions Do Not Prolong the Stop

Traffic-Stop “Mission” Includes Scene Control When Driver Cannot Lawfully Depart: Brief Drug/Weapon Questions Do Not Prolong the Stop

Date: Apr 20, 2026
Traffic-Stop “Mission” Includes Scene Control When Driver Cannot Lawfully Depart: Brief Drug/Weapon Questions Do Not Prolong the Stop Introduction In Commonwealth v. Knight-Walker (Va. Apr. 16,...
Market-Familiar Drug Dealer Inference: Knowledge of Fentanyl in a Heroin/Fentanyl Mixture & Limits of the “Reasonable Hypothesis of Innocence”

Market-Familiar Drug Dealer Inference: Knowledge of Fentanyl in a Heroin/Fentanyl Mixture & Limits of the “Reasonable Hypothesis of Innocence”

Date: Apr 20, 2026
Market-Familiar Drug Dealer Inference: Knowledge of Fentanyl in a Heroin/Fentanyl Mixture & Limits of the “Reasonable Hypothesis of Innocence” I. Introduction In Cuffee v. Commonwealth (Supreme Court...
Defined-Width Easements Governed by Purpose-and-Reasonableness (Not Automatic “Clear the Full Width”) Rule

Defined-Width Easements Governed by Purpose-and-Reasonableness (Not Automatic “Clear the Full Width”) Rule

Date: Apr 16, 2026
Defined-Width Easements Governed by Purpose-and-Reasonableness (Not Automatic “Clear the Full Width”) Rule Thibault Enterprises, LLC v. Yost (Supreme Court of Virginia, Apr. 9, 2026) — Opinion by...
Stevens v. Jurnigan: Appellate Deference to Circuit Court Factfinding on Evidentiary Pleas in Bar

Stevens v. Jurnigan: Appellate Deference to Circuit Court Factfinding on Evidentiary Pleas in Bar

Date: Apr 10, 2026
Stevens v. Jurnigan: Appellate Deference to Circuit Court Factfinding on Evidentiary Pleas in Bar I. Introduction Case: Stevens v. Jurnigan (Supreme Court of Virginia, Apr. 9, 2026). Parties:...
Nonmandatory Child-Abuse Reporters Receive § 63.2-1512 Immunity Only for Complaints Made “Pursuant to” § 63.2-1510 (Not to Law Enforcement Alone)

Nonmandatory Child-Abuse Reporters Receive § 63.2-1512 Immunity Only for Complaints Made “Pursuant to” § 63.2-1510 (Not to Law Enforcement Alone)

Date: Apr 4, 2026
Nonmandatory Child-Abuse Reporters Receive § 63.2-1512 Immunity Only for Complaints Made “Pursuant to” § 63.2-1510 (Not to Law Enforcement Alone) Introduction In Cupp v. Delta Air Lines, Inc....
Indefinite-Form Probation Clauses Are Not Facially Invalid When Statutory Caps Apply: Commonwealth v. Moncrea

Indefinite-Form Probation Clauses Are Not Facially Invalid When Statutory Caps Apply: Commonwealth v. Moncrea

Date: Apr 4, 2026
Indefinite-Form Probation Clauses Are Not Facially Invalid When Statutory Caps Apply: Commonwealth v. Moncrea Supreme Court of Virginia (Apr. 2, 2026) — Record No. 240844 1. Introduction In...
Lee v. Virginia State Bar: Harmless-Error Cure for Alleged Bar Certification Irregularities After De Novo Discipline Trial

Lee v. Virginia State Bar: Harmless-Error Cure for Alleged Bar Certification Irregularities After De Novo Discipline Trial

Date: Mar 21, 2026
Lee v. Virginia State Bar: Harmless-Error Cure for Alleged Bar Certification Irregularities After De Novo Discipline Trial Introduction In Lee v. Virginia State Bar (Va. Mar. 19, 2026), the Supreme...
Clarifying “Promptly” on Remand and Ending § 8.01-626 Interlocutory Jurisdiction After a Stay-Only Order

Clarifying “Promptly” on Remand and Ending § 8.01-626 Interlocutory Jurisdiction After a Stay-Only Order

Date: Mar 19, 2026
Clarifying “Promptly” on Remand and Ending § 8.01-626 Interlocutory Jurisdiction After a Stay-Only Order Introduction Koski v. Republican National Committee (ORDER) is an order of the Supreme Court...
“Just Cause” Under Code § 63.2-1202(H) Is a Discretionary, Totality-of-Circumstances Standard (Not a Per Se Rule) Even When a No-Contact Order Exists

“Just Cause” Under Code § 63.2-1202(H) Is a Discretionary, Totality-of-Circumstances Standard (Not a Per Se Rule) Even When a No-Contact Order Exists

Date: Mar 14, 2026
“Just Cause” Under Code § 63.2-1202(H) Is a Discretionary, Totality-of-Circumstances Standard (Not a Per Se Rule) Even When a No-Contact Order Exists I. Introduction In Perkins v. Howington (Va. Mar....
Koski v. Republican National Committee: Broad Election-Enjoining TRO Treated as Appealable Preliminary Injunction; Scott v. James Prudential Bar on Enjoining Referenda

Koski v. Republican National Committee: Broad Election-Enjoining TRO Treated as Appealable Preliminary Injunction; Scott v. James Prudential Bar on Enjoining Referenda

Date: Mar 7, 2026
Koski v. Republican National Committee: Broad Election-Enjoining TRO Treated as Appealable Preliminary Injunction; Scott v. James Prudential Bar on Enjoining Referenda 1. Introduction In Koski v....
Garofalo v. Di Vincenzo: Virginia Defines “Evident Partiality” as Objectively Obvious Bias and Holds Mere (Even Material) Nondisclosure Is Not Automatically Vacatur

Garofalo v. Di Vincenzo: Virginia Defines “Evident Partiality” as Objectively Obvious Bias and Holds Mere (Even Material) Nondisclosure Is Not Automatically Vacatur

Date: Feb 27, 2026
Garofalo v. Di Vincenzo: Virginia Defines “Evident Partiality” as Objectively Obvious Bias and Holds Mere Nondisclosure Is Not Automatically Vacatur I. Introduction Case: Garofalo v. Di Vincenzo...
Corporate Derivative Sovereign Immunity Requires a James v. Jane Fact Inquiry (No Automatic Immunity for Hospital-Authority Subsidiaries)

Corporate Derivative Sovereign Immunity Requires a James v. Jane Fact Inquiry (No Automatic Immunity for Hospital-Authority Subsidiaries)

Date: Feb 27, 2026
Corporate Derivative Sovereign Immunity Requires a James v. Jane Fact Inquiry (No Automatic Immunity for Hospital-Authority Subsidiaries) I. Introduction In Sentara Medical Group v. Klena (Supreme...
Transmission CPCNs in Virginia: “Consideration” Means Reflection, Not Substantial-Accord Findings; Staff Verification Suffices Under Code § 56-46.1(B)

Transmission CPCNs in Virginia: “Consideration” Means Reflection, Not Substantial-Accord Findings; Staff Verification Suffices Under Code § 56-46.1(B)

Date: Feb 26, 2026
Transmission CPCNs in Virginia: “Consideration” Means Reflection, Not Substantial-Accord Findings; Staff Verification Suffices Under Code § 56-46.1(B) Lansdowne Conservancy v. SCCC, Supreme Court of...
Loudoun County v. State Corporation Commission: “Consideration,” Not “Substantial Accord,” Governs Local Plans in CPCNs; Undergrounding May Be Rejected as Infeasible Based on Cost, Engineering, and Schedule Impediments

Loudoun County v. State Corporation Commission: “Consideration,” Not “Substantial Accord,” Governs Local Plans in CPCNs; Undergrounding May Be Rejected as Infeasible Based on Cost, Engineering, and Schedule Impediments

Date: Feb 26, 2026
Loudoun County v. State Corporation Commission: “Consideration,” Not “Substantial Accord,” Governs Local Plans in CPCNs; Undergrounding May Be Rejected as Infeasible Based on Cost, Engineering, and...
“Consideration” Means Reflection: SCC Need Not Make Local “Substantial Accord” Findings When Granting Transmission-Line CPCNs Under Code § 56-46.1

“Consideration” Means Reflection: SCC Need Not Make Local “Substantial Accord” Findings When Granting Transmission-Line CPCNs Under Code § 56-46.1

Date: Feb 26, 2026
“Consideration” Means Reflection: SCC Need Not Make Local “Substantial Accord” Findings When Granting Transmission-Line CPCNs Under Code § 56-46.1 I. Introduction In Loudoun County v. SCC...
Next
CaseMine Logo

Know us better!

  • Request a Demo
  • Watch Casemine overview Videos

Company

  • About Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms
  • Careers
  • FAQs
  • Columns
  • Contact Us

Help

  • Pricing
  • Help & Support
  • Features
  • Workflow
  • Campus Connect Fellow Program
  • 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