Unpublished Dispositionerrol Selznick, Plaintiff-appellant,errol Selznick Machinery Corporation, Plaintiff, v. Ohio Bell Telephone Company, Defendant-appellee, 914 F.2d 258 (6th Cir. 1990)
Annotate this CaseBefore KENNEDY and RALPH B. GUY, Jr., Circuit Judges; and BAILEY BROWN, Senior Circuit Judge.
ORDER
Errol Selznick, an Ohio citizen, appeals pro se the dismissal of his cause of action due to lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The case has been referred to a panel of the court pursuant to Rule 9(a), Rules of the Sixth Circuit. Upon examination of the record and briefs, this panel unanimously agrees that oral argument is not needed. Fed. R. App. P. 34(a).
Selznick sued the Ohio Bell Telephone Company, alleging that it was not responding properly to his complaints of interference with his receipt of personal and business calls. Defendant moved for dismissal based on lack of subject matter jurisdiction, and the district court granted the motion.
Upon consideration, we find that this case was properly dismissed, as the complaint failed to invoke the jurisdiction of the federal district court. See Walls v. Waste Resource Corp., 761 F.2d 311, 317 (6th Cir. 1985). Accordingly, the district court's order is affirmed. Rule 9(b) (5), Rules of the Sixth Circuit.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
