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)
05-2204•In re: Stanley James Development Corporation
05-2204Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitMay 25, 2006
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-2204
In Re: STANLEY JAMES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION,
Debtor.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
JAMES KING,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
BRIAN A. GOLDMAN, Trustee,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore. Andre M. Davis, District Judge. (CA-05-
1726-AMD)
Submitted: May 18, 2006 Decided: May 25, 2006
Before WIDENER and WILKINSON, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
James King, Appellant Pro Se. Carl Steven Silverman, GOLDMAN &
GOLDMAN, PA, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
- 2 -
PER CURIAM:
James King appeals from the district court’s order
dismissing the appeal filed by King on behalf of Stanley James
Development Corporation. The notice of appeal to this court was
signed only by King, who is not an attorney. It is well settled
that a corporation cannot appear in federal court except through
its attorney. Rowland v. California Men’s Colony, 506 U.S. 194,
201-02 (1993). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal. 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.
DISMISSED
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.