Brackens v. Brackens, 06-30861 (2007)
Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Number: 06-30861
Visitors: 65
Filed: Apr. 09, 2007
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit F I L E D UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT April 9, 2007 _ Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 06-30861 Summary Calendar _ STACEY W. BRACKENS, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus GLORIA BRACKENS LEONARD; GEORGIA MAE BRACKENS MCGOLTHEN; TOMMY RAY BRACKENS; DAVID LEBARON Defendants-Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana No. 5:05-CV-1377 Before JONES, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and OWEN, Circui
Summary: United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit F I L E D UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT April 9, 2007 _ Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 06-30861 Summary Calendar _ STACEY W. BRACKENS, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus GLORIA BRACKENS LEONARD; GEORGIA MAE BRACKENS MCGOLTHEN; TOMMY RAY BRACKENS; DAVID LEBARON Defendants-Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana No. 5:05-CV-1377 Before JONES, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and OWEN, Circuit..
More
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT April 9, 2007
_______________________ Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 06-30861
Summary Calendar
_______________________
STACEY W. BRACKENS,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
GLORIA BRACKENS LEONARD;
GEORGIA MAE BRACKENS MCGOLTHEN;
TOMMY RAY BRACKENS;
DAVID LEBARON
Defendants-Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Louisiana
No. 5:05-CV-1377
Before JONES, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and OWEN, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
In this case, brought in federal court based on diversity
of citizenship, the district court correctly held that Plaintiff
Stacey Brackens did not allege an amount in controversy exceeding
$75,000, as required by 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a). The district court’s
order dismissing the case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction
is therefore AFFIRMED.
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this
opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited
circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
Source: CourtListener