DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE:  March 9, 2017
CBCA 4794
JOHN LEWINGER, AS RECEIVER OF 2412 INTERNATIONAL AVENUE SE,
ALBUQUERQUE, NEW MEXICO,
                                                Appellant,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS,
                                                Respondent.
John Lewinger, Albuquerque, NM, Appellant.
David G. Fagan, Office of General Counsel, Department of Veterans Affairs,
Portland, OR, counsel for Respondent.
Before Board Judges GOODMAN, LESTER, and CHADWICK.
CHADWICK, Board Judge.
This appeal was filed in June 2015.  In June 2016, the Board denied, without prejudice
to renewal after development of the record, the respondent’s motion to dismiss the appeal for
lack of jurisdiction.  Lewinger v. Department of Veterans Affairs, CBCA 4794, 16-1 BCA
¶ 36,413.  In September 2016, we reformed the caption, with the parties’ agreement, to
identify the appellant as the court-appointed receiver “of” a commercial building in
Albuquerque, New Mexico, rather than “for” a third party, as he had been identified in the
notice of appeal.  In January 2017, after a stay, and before the parties had proposed a
discovery schedule, the appellant’s former attorney moved to withdraw, stating that the
appellant had stopped giving him instructions.  We granted that motion in an order issued on
January 23, 2017.  No one has since entered an appearance on the appellant’s behalf.  

CBCA 4794 2
On February 27, 2017, the appellant advised the Board by email that he “has no funds
to retain coun[se]1,” and that he considers this matter “conclude[d].”  We stated in an order
issued and emailed to the parties on February 28, 2017, that we construed the appellant’s
email message as a motion to dismiss the appeal, and that we would do so if neither party
objected within one week.  Neither party objected.
We did receive an informal objection from an entity that is not before us.  A managing
director of Corban Capital Partners contacted the presiding judge’s assistant by telephone and
email, asking that the appeal be stayed further or, alternatively, that a dismissal be without
prejudice.  We infer from its name that Corban Capital Partners is affiliated with the plaintiff
in Corban ABQ V LLC v. Albuquerque Facility, LLC, No. D-202-CV-2012-09824 (N.M. 2d
Dist.), the state litigation in which the court appointed the appellant the receiver of the
building in Albuquerque.  See Lewinger, 16-1 BCA at 177,543.  While one or more Corban
entities may have a financial interest in this appeal, “[i]t bears repeating that the appellant is
the receiver alone.”  Id. at 177,547; see id. at 177,549 n.4 (“[T]he receiver, not Corban [ABQ
V LLC], is the appellant[.]”).  The appellant, an individual who is not an attorney, may
represent only himself or an entity of which he is an officer or partner.  Board Rule 5(a)(1)
(48 CFR 6101.5(a)(1) (2015)).  The appellant is a real estate broker who pursued the claim
as an individual appointee of the state court.  See Lewinger, 16-1 BCA at 177,543-44.  He
does not represent Corban Capital Partners in this appeal, nor does that entity, or any of its
officers, represent or speak for him.
Nonetheless, given that “our jurisdiction is in doubt,” Lewinger, 16-1 BCA at
177,548, we agree with non-party Corban Capital Partners that we should not dismiss the
appeal with prejudice.
Decision
The appeal is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
______________________________
KYLE CHADWICK
Board Judge
We concur:
____________________________ ______________________________
ALLAN H. GOODMAN HAROLD D. LESTER, JR.
Board Judge Board Judge