Opinion ID: 2968520
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: 2d at 764-65 (quotation omitted).

Text: We, therefore, reverse the district court’s grant of summary judgment on Henry’s state-law claim and remand to the district court, which may then determine whether to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over that claim. See Yashenko v. Harrah’s N.C. Casino Co., LLC, 446 F.3d 541, 553 n.4 (4th Cir. 2006) (explaining that once the federal claims in an action are dismissed the district court possesses wide discretion to dismiss the supplemental state law claims over which it properly has supplemental jurisdiction) (quotation omitted). If the district court chooses to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Henry’s state-law claim, it may then determine whether Purnell is entitled to statutory immunity under Maryland law.