3 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 19 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side — they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Borras-Borrero v. Corp del Fondo del Seguro del.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Borras-Borrero v. Corp del Fondo del Seguro del Anchor | green | “that district courts may decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over pendent state law claims when the anchor federal claims for those state law claims are dismissed.” | 9 |
| 2 | Masso-Torrellas v. Municipality of Toa Alta | green | “in the usual case in which all federal-law claims are eliminated before trial, the balance of factors ... will point toward declining to exercise jurisdiction over the remaining state-law claims.” | 7 |
| 3 | Borras-Borrero v. Corp del Fondo del Seguro del | green | “it is settled law that district courts may decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over pendent state law claims when the anchor federal claims for those state law claims are dismissed.” | 3 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment — for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.