Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Bruce Chambers v. Maxie Mayo, 11-60354 (2012)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Number: 11-60354 Visitors: 68
Filed: Jun. 06, 2012
Latest Update: Mar. 26, 2017
Summary: Case: 11-60354 Document: 00511878342 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/06/2012 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED June 6, 2012 No. 11-60354 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk BRUCE CHAMBERS, Plaintiff-Appellant v. MAXIE K. MAYO; MICHAEL MAYO; RICHARD CALDWELL; MAYO AND SONS FUEL AND ELECTRIC, INCORPORATED; MAYO AND SONS, INCORPORATED, Defendants-Appellees Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi USDC N
More
Case: 11-60354 Document: 00511878342 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/06/2012 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED June 6, 2012 No. 11-60354 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk BRUCE CHAMBERS, Plaintiff-Appellant v. MAXIE K. MAYO; MICHAEL MAYO; RICHARD CALDWELL; MAYO AND SONS FUEL AND ELECTRIC, INCORPORATED; MAYO AND SONS, INCORPORATED, Defendants-Appellees Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi USDC No. 3:10-CV-525 Before JONES, Chief Judge, and WIENER and GRAVES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Appellant Bruce Chambers. resident of Mississippi, challenges the dismissal with prejudice of his dispute with former partners and Louisiana residents, Maxie Mayo, Michael Mayo, and Richard Caldwell. The district court carefully explained why Chambers failed to establish proper venue in Mississippi for any of his alleged claims. On appeal, Chambers does not * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. Case: 11-60354 Document: 00511878342 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/06/2012 No. 11-60354 challenge the decision to dismiss as such, but he objects that the case was dismissed with prejudice. He wants to sue another day. As the district court noted, however, Chambers has already struck out twice in Louisiana state and federal courts. He abandoned a state case, and the federal case was dismissed for lack of the amount in controversy for federal jurisdiction. Under these unusual circumstances, no point would be served by dismissing this case without prejudice—the doors of Louisiana courts are closed. The district court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing with prejudice. JUDGMENT AFFIRMED. 2
Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer