Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 514 U.S. 35 - Swint v. Chambers County Commission

Swint v. Chambers County Commission’s Empirical Analysis

1995

Citation profile

2,314
cited by 2,314 later decisions
37
cited 37 times by the Supreme Court
12
states following
February 2026
most recently cited

1,289 federal appellate · 52 district · 61 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 2,314 later decisions (37 by the Supreme Court) — most recently February 2026 · most notably Ashcroft v. Iqbal (2009), Johnson v. Jones (1995)

1,289 federal appellate · 52 district · 61 state decisions — followed in 12 states

78401995200020102020decided

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.

Appellate journey

reviewedSwint v. City of Wadley (from Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals)

Relationships

Relies on Monell v. Department of Social Services of City of New York · Anderson v. Creighton · Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp. · Mitchell v. Forsyth · Eisen v. Carlisle & Jacquelin

Cited together with Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp. · Mitchell v. Forsyth · Johnson v. Jones · Harlow v. Fitzgerald · Anderson v. Creighton

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 2,314 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “necessary to ensure meaningful review of”
    69 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “includes only decisions that are conclusive, that resolve important questions separate from the merits, and that are effectively unreviewable on appeal from the final judgment in the underlying action.”
    21 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “involves a controlling question of law as to which there is substantial ground for difference of opinion and that an immediate appeal from the order may materially advance the ultimate termination of the litigation.”
    17 later decisions 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.