Court Opinion

ID: 9397276
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-05-24 21:01:00.865867+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:19:23.298179
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 23-1051      Doc: 9         Filed: 05/23/2023     Pg: 1 of 2

                                             UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                               No. 23-1051

        TIGRESS MCDANIEL,

                             Plaintiff - Appellant,

                      v.

        CHARLOTTE MECKLENBURG BLACK                           POLITICAL       CAUCUS     OF
        CHARLOTTE; MEKO CHOSEN; DOES,

                             Defendants - Appellees.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at
        Charlotte. David Shepardson Cayer, Magistrate Judge. (3:22-cv-00236-MOC-DSC)

        Submitted: May 18, 2023                                              Decided: May 23, 2023

        Before NIEMEYER, RICHARDSON, and RUSHING, Circuit Judges.

        Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Tigress Sydney Acute McDaniel, Appellant Pro Se.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 23-1051      Doc: 9         Filed: 05/23/2023     Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Tigress McDaniel appeals the magistrate judge’s postjudgment text order denying

        McDaniel’s as-construed motion to amend her previously dismissed complaint. We

        discern no abuse of discretion in the magistrate judge’s ruling, given that McDaniel did not

        proffer the proposed amended complaint or otherwise address how she would remedy the

        previously identified jurisdictional defects. See Willner v. Dimon, 849 F.3d 93, 114 (4th

        Cir. 2017) (“Where, as here, the plaintiff fails to formally move to amend and fails to

        provide the district court with any proposed amended complaint or other indication of the

        amendments [s]he wishes to make, the district court does not abuse its discretion in denying

        leave to amend.” (brackets omitted)). Accordingly, we affirm the appealed-from order.

        McDaniel v. Charlotte Mecklenburg Black Pol. Caucus of Charlotte, No. 3:22-cv-00236-

        MOC-DSC (W.D.N.C. Jan. 4, 2023). 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

                                                     2