The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
05-2158•Virgie B. Hubbard v. Elliott, Incorporated
05-2158Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitFeb 28, 2006
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-2158
VIRGIE B. HUBBARD; DENNIS G. HUBBARD; DENNIS
G. HUBBARD, JR.,
Plaintiffs - Appellants,
versus
ELLIOTT, INCORPORATED,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern
District of West Virginia, at Bluefield. David A. Faber, Chief
District Judge. (CA-04-589)
Submitted: February 23, 2006 Decided: February 28, 2006
Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Virgie B. Hubbard, Dennis G. Hubbard, and Dennis G. Hubbard, Jr.,
Appellants Pro Se. John Headley Shott, Sr., SHOTT, GURGANUS &
WILLIAMSON, Bluefield, West Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
- 2 -
PER CURIAM:
Virgie B. Hubbard, Dennis G. Hubbard, and Dennis G.
Hubbard, Jr., appeal the district court’s order accepting the
recommendation of the magistrate judge dismissing their civil
action for lack of jurisdiction. We have reviewed the record and
find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning
of the district court. See Hubbard v. Elliott, Inc., No. CA-04-589
(S.D.W. Va. Sept. 28, 2005). We dispense with oral argument
because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in
the materials before the court and argument would not aid the
decisional process.
AFFIRMED
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.