Gibson’s Empirical Analysis
Citation profile
4 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently July 2024 · most notably Alberson v. Norris Md, Canadian Import Antitrust Litigation v. Plc (2006)
4 district · 2 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on Estelle v. Gamble · Andrews v. Fowler · Labickas v. Arkansas State University · McLaurin v. Prater · No. 94-3574sd
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 25 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Under 28 U.S.C. § 1367 (c)(3), a court may “decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over a claim * * * [if] the district court has dismissed all claims over which it has original jurisdiction.” Congress unambiguously gave district courts discretion in 28 U.S.C. § 1367 (c) to dismiss supplemental state law claims when all federal claims have been dismissed, and there is no basis to find an abuse of discretion here. See Labickas v. Arkansas State University, 78 F.3d 333, 334 (8th Cir.1996); McLaurin v. Prater, CO-1, 30 F.3d 982, 985 (8th Cir.1994).”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“will point toward declining to exercise jurisdiction over the remaining state law claims.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.