Carnegie-Mellon University v. Cohill
- Decided
- January 20, 1988
- Docket
- 86-1021
- Status
- Published
- Jurisdiction
- Federal
Cited 9,468 timesSuperseded by statute (verified)Possible negative treatment: superseded by statute, superseded on other grounds, abrogated on other grounds (16 of 94 verified; none is a verified overruling) · (PC) Shepherd v. Nueschmid
What later courts said
- recognizing that, in such cases, the balance of interests will usually point toward declining to exercise jurisdiction — Taylor v. First of America Bank-Wayne (1992)
- recognizing that, in such cases, the balance of interests will usually point toward declining to exercise jurisdiction — Taylor v. First of America Bank-Wayne (1992)
- holding that the supplemental jurisdiction statute applies with equal force to cases removed to federal court — Rhode Island Fishermen's Alliance, Inc. v. Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management (2009)
Each line is a later court’s own words about this case, not a summary. Read the opinion before relying on it.
How the opinion begins
[*345] Justice Marshall delivered the opinion of the Court.
The question before us is whether a federal district court has discretion under the doctrine of pendent jurisdiction to remand a properly removed case to state court when all federal-law claims in the action have been eliminated and only pendent state-law claims remain.
I
Statutes cited
Cite this
Carnegie-Mellon University v. Cohill, 484 U.S. 343 (1988)Read the full opinion
Reading the library on this site uses your account’s daily calls, the same as the connector and the API. The Free plan needs no card. Calls a day on each plan.