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)
06-1234•Brian L. Howard v. Lamberts Cable Splicing, a/k/a Lamberts’ Cable Splicing Company, Inc., a/k/a…
06-1234Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitJun 19, 2006
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-1234
BRIAN L. HOWARD; LINDA B. HOWARD,
Plaintiffs - Appellants,
versus
LAMBERTS CABLE SPLICING, a/k/a Lamberts’ Cable
Splicing Company, Inc., a/k/a Lambert’s Cable
Splicing Company, a/k/a Lamberts Cable
Splicing Company, LLC, a Delaware LLC, a/k/a
Lamberts Cable Splicing Company of Florida,
LLC; THOMAS L. LAMBERT, a/k/a Thomas L.
Lambert, Jr., a/k/a Tom Lambert, a/k/a Tom or
Thomas Lambert, Jr., a/k/a Tommy Lambert;
KAREN LAMBERT ALLEN, a/k/a Karen Lambert
Allan; DYCOM INDUSTRIES CORPORATION, a/k/a
Dycom Corporation, a/k/a Dycom Investments,
Inc.,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. James C. Fox, Senior
District Judge. (5:05-cv-00636-F)
Submitted: June 15, 2006 Decided: June 19, 2006
Before KING, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
-- 1 of 3 --
- 2 -
Brian L. Howard, Linda B. Howard, Appellants Pro Se. Scott David
Zimmerman, BROWN & BUNCH, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, for
Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 2 of 3 --
- 3 -
PER CURIAM:
Brian L. Howard and Linda B. Howard appeal the district
court’s order dismissing their civil action for lack of subject
matter jurisdiction under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1) and 28 U.S.C.
§ 1332 (2000). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible
error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the
district court. See Howard v. Lambert Cable Splicing, No. 5:05-cv-
00636-F (E.D.N.C. Dec. 15, 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
-- 3 of 3 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.