Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
3 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 42 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 Lowrey v. Texas A & M Univ. Sys., 117 F.3d 242 , 246-47 (5th Cir.1997) (citation and internal quotation omitted). 3 . McGore v. Wriggleswo.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Lowrey v. Texas A & M Univ. Sys., 117 F.3d 242 , 246-47 (5th Cir.1997) (citation and internal quotation omitted). 3 . McGore v. Wriggleswo Anchor | green | “generally a district court errs in dismissing a pro se complaint for failure to state a claim under rule 12(b)(6) without giving the plaintiff an opportunity to amend.” | 28 |
| 2 | Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's v. Warrantech Corp. | green | “courts should decline supplemental jurisdiction over state law claims when all federal claims are dismissed or otherwise eliminated from a case.” | 7 |
| 3 | Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's v. Warrantech Corp. | green | “decline supplemental jurisdiction over state law claims when all federal claims are dismissed or otherwise eliminated from a case.” | 7 |
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.