Court Opinion

ID: 9397983
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-05-27 21:00:37.780023+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:19:29.509761
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 23-1087      Doc: 7        Filed: 05/26/2023     Pg: 1 of 2

                                            UNPUBLISHED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        Affirmed as modified by unpublished per curiam opinion.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        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 23-1087         Doc: 7      Filed: 05/26/2023     Pg: 2 of 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