Supreme Court· 3/1/1995

Swint v. Chambers County Commission

Citations

514 U.S. 35
115 S. Ct. 1203
131 L. Ed. 2d 60
1995 U.S. LEXIS 1805
95 Daily Journal DAR 2665
63 U.S.L.W. 4189
8 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 621
95 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 1515
31 Fed. R. Serv. 3d 1

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

recognizing “Congress has not abrogated state sovereign immunity . . . under § 1983”
discussing whether issue is “pivotal and debatable” as guiding discretion, which overlap virtually entirely with statutory criteria
counseling “resistance to expansion of appellate jurisdiction” over issues not implicated in interlocutory appeals
“Congress thus chose to confer on 12 district courts first[-]line discretion to allow interlocutory appeals [under § 1292(b)].”
“Congress . . . circumscribed [a district court’s] authority to certify for immediate appeal interlocutory orders deemed pivotal and debatable.”
“We need not definitively or preemptively settle here whether or when it may be proper for a court of appeals, with jurisdiction over one ruling, to review, conjunctively, related rulings that are not themselves independently appealable.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Ginsburg

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

849 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

23 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named Swint v. Chambers County Commission

7 other CourtListener records share this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.