Court Opinion

ID: 9881793
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-10-03 21:01:09.320482+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:16:48.874435
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 23-1310      Doc: 17         Filed: 10/02/2023    Pg: 1 of 2

                                            UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                              No. 23-1310

        DAUNDRA GRIER,

                            Plaintiff - Appellant,

                     v.

        HUD, c/o Attorney General of the United States; HOUSING AUTHORITY OF
        ELKTON MARYLAND; HOUSING AUTHORITY OF DALLAS TEXAS,

                            Defendants - Appellees.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt.
        Paula Xinis, District Judge. (8:21-cv-02165-PX)

        Submitted: September 28, 2023                                     Decided: October 2, 2023

        Before NIEMEYER, THACKER, and RUSHING, Circuit Judges.

        Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Daundra Grier, Appellant Pro Se. Matthew Adam Haven, OFFICE OF THE UNITED
        STATES ATTORNEY, Baltimore, Maryland; Carrie Blackburn Riley, BLACKBURN
        RILEY LLC, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 23-1310      Doc: 17         Filed: 10/02/2023    Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Daundra Grier filed suit against the United States Department of Housing and Urban

        Development (“HUD”), the Housing Authority of Elkton, Maryland (“EHA”), and the

        Housing Authority of Dallas, Texas (“DHA”), asserting civil rights violations and

        violations of the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA), 28 U.S.C. §§ 2671 to 2680, allegedly

        committed in the wake of Hurricane Katrina. On appeal, Grier challenges the district

        court’s orders granting HUD’s and EHA’s motions to dismiss and dismissing DHA from

        the action pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m).

               We have reviewed the record in conjunction with the arguments Grier raises in her

        informal brief and have found no reversible error. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b); see also Jackson

        v. Lightsey, 775 F.3d 170, 177 (4th Cir. 2014) (“The informal brief is an important

        document; under Fourth Circuit rules, our review is limited to issues preserved in that

        brief.”). We therefore affirm the district court’s orders. See Grier v. HUD, No. 8:21-cv-

        02165-PX (D. Md. Nov. 1, 2022; Nov. 14, 2022; Dec. 6, 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