Ammerman v. Sween’s Empirical Analysis
54 F.3d 423 · 1995
Citation profile
10 federal appellate · 4 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 59 later decisions — most recently January 2025 · most notably Channell v. Citicorp National Services, Inc. (1996), Mendoza v. Zirkle Fruit Co. (2002)
10 federal appellate · 4 district ·
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
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1367 · 29 U.S.C. § 206 (Equal Pay Act of 1963) · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 701 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964)
Relies on United Mine Workers of America v. Gibbs · Carnegie-Mellon University v. Cohill · Baskerville v. Culligan International Co. · United States v. Hays · Brazinski v. Amoco Petroleum Additives Co.
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 59 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[I]n any civil action of which the district courts have original jurisdiction, the district courts shall have supplemental jurisdiction over all other claims that are so related to claims in the action within such original jurisdiction that they form part of the same case or controversy under Article III of the United States Constitution.”
2 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.