Charles Dixon, et al v. Richard Freese, et al, No. 14-60906 (5th Cir. 2015)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 14-60906 Document: 00513192025 Page: 1 Date Filed: 09/14/2015 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit FILED No. 14-60906 September 14, 2015 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk CHARLES DIXON, Individually and on behalf of the 345 other named plaintiffs; AMELIA WAY, Individually and on behalf of the 345 other named plaintiffs; SHEILA GARY EVANS, Individually and on behalf of the 345 other named plaintiffs; CICILIA JEFFERSON, Individually and on behalf of the 345 other named plaintiffs, Plaintiffs - Appellants v. RICHARD A. FREESE; TIM K. GOSS; FREESE & GOSS, P.L.L.C.; JOHN AND JANE DOES, Individually and as Entities, Defendants - Appellees Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi USDC No. 3:13-CV-236 Before JONES, SMITH, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* The court has carefully considered this appeal in light of the briefs and record. Having done so, we conclude that there is neither clear error nor any reversible error of law in the district court’s decision that the admission of a 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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: 14-60906 Document: 00513192025 Page: 2 Date Filed: 09/14/2015 No. 14-60906 non-equity member by the unanimous agreement of the LLC’s equity members occurred substantially in accordance with Texas law. See Tex. Bus. Org. Code §§ 101.001(1) (“company agreement” defined to include written or oral agreements), 101.053 (each member must consent to an amendment of the company agreement, 101.103(c) (a non-equity member may be admitted on consent of all the company members); 101.102(c) (the company agreement may provide for admission of non-equity members), and 101.104(b) (rights of a class of members may be stated in the company agreement or at the time the class is established). Accordingly, we AFFIRM, for essentially the reasons stated by the trial court, its decision to dismiss the case for lack of federal jurisdiction. 2
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.
