Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 577 F.3d 701 - Brooks v. Rothe

Brooks v. Rothe’s Empirical Analysis

577 F.3d 701 · 2009

Citation profile

26
cited by 26 later decisions
1
states following
July 2020
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently July 2020 · most notably Sykes v. Anderson (2010), Miller v. Sanilac County (2010)

4 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

240200920102020decided

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 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio Corporation · Monell v. Department of Social Services of City of New York · Pearson v. Callahan · Pembaur v. City of Cincinnati

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

  1. “(c) The district courts may decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over a claim under subsection (1) if— (1) the claim raises a novel or complex issue of State law, (2) the claim substantially predominates over the claim or claims over which the district court has original jurisdiction, (3) the district court has dismissed all claims over which it has original jurisdiction, or (4) in exceptional circumstances, there are other compelling reasons for declining jurisdiction.”
    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.