Der KI-Arbeitsbereich für Juristen
- Rechtsrecherche mit Zugriff auf über 1 Million Quellen
- Dokumentenautomatisierung
- Mandatsverwaltung
- Gehostet in der EU und der Schweiz
14 Tage kostenlos testen (10 Fragen/Tag während der Testphase)
Der KI-Arbeitsbereich für Juristen
14 Tage kostenlos testen (10 Fragen/Tag während der Testphase)
23-1087•Stephen E. Lee v. TRACY MODLIN, Supervisor HUD/VASH Housing
23-1087Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit26.05.2023
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 23-1087
STEPHEN E. LEE,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
TRACY MODLIN, Supervisor HUD/VASH Housing; BRANDON PIPPENS, VA
Hud VASH Case Worker; CRAIG COOKE, Assistant Chief Hud VASH Housing;
JOHN CLOW, Chief HUD VASH Housing; MORRIS RICKS, Patient
Advocate/Consumer Relations; ANTHONY GIBSON, Supervisor/Consumer
Relations; DET. DARNELL DAVIS, VAMC; RASHEED SAVAGE, Program
Mgr/Helping Up Mission; UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore.
Deborah Lynn Boardman, District Judge. (1:21-cv-01609-DLB)
Submitted: May 23, 2023 Decided: May 26, 2023
Before AGEE, WYNN, and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed as modified by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Stephen E. Lee, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Stephen E. Lee appeals the district court’s orders dismissing his claims against
Defendants for lack of jurisdiction and denying Lee’s motions for appointment of counsel.
We have reviewed the record and discern no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the
district court’s dismissal orders, Lee v. Savage, No. 1:21-cv-01609-DLB (D. Md. filed
Apr. 25, 2022 & entered Apr. 26, 2022; Dec. 27, 2022), as modified to reflect that the
dismissal of Lee’s claims is without prejudice, see S. Walk at Broadlands Homeowner’s
Ass’n, Inc. v. OpenBand at Broadlands, LLC, 713 F.3d 175, 185 (4th Cir. 2013) (“A
dismissal for lack of . . . subject matter jurisdiction . . . must be one without prejudice,
because a court that lacks jurisdiction has no power to adjudicate and dispose of a claim on
the merits.”). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are
adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the
decisional process.
AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED
-- 2 of 2 --
Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.