Francis Ndika v. Mrs. Maranon

Fourth Circuit

Francis Ndika v. Mrs. Maranon

700 F. App'x 290

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedNovember 7, 2017

Docket17-1637

StatusUnpublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 700 F. App'x 290 (Francis Ndika v. Mrs. Maranon) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Francis Ndika v. Mrs. Maranon, 700 F. App'x 290 (4th Cir. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Francis 0. Ndika appeals the district court’s order granting defendant’s motion to dismiss his complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. We have reviewed the record and Ndika’s claims and find no reversible error. The court’s dismissal, however, should have been without prejudice. See S. Walk at Broadlands Homeowner’s Assoc., Inc. v. OpenBand at Broadlands, LLC, 713 F.3d 175, 185 (4th Cir. 2013). We therefore grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, modify the district court’s order to reflect that the dismissal of Ndika’s complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction is without prejudice, and affirm the dismissal as modified. See 28 U.S.C. § 2106 (2012); MM ex rel. DM v. Sch. Dist. Of Greenville Cty., 303 F.3d 523, 536 (4th Cir. 2002) (“[W]e are entitled to affirm the court’s judgment on alternate grounds, if such grounds are apparent from the record.”).

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

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Francis 0. Ndika appeals the district court’s order granting defendant’s motion to dismiss his complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. We have reviewed the record and Ndika’s claims and find no reversible error. The court’s dismissal, however, should have been without prejudice. See S. Walk at Broadlands Homeowner’s Assoc., Inc. v. OpenBand at Broadlands, LLC, 713 F.3d 175, 185 (4th Cir. 2013). We therefore grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, modify the district court’s order to reflect that the dismissal of Ndika’s complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction is without prejudice, and affirm the dismissal as modified. See 28 U.S.C. § 2106 (2012); MM ex rel. DM v. Sch. Dist. Of Greenville Cty., 303 F.3d 523, 536 (4th Cir. 2002) (“[W]e are entitled to affirm the court’s judgment on alternate grounds, if such grounds are apparent from the record.”).

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

700 F. App'x 290, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/francis-ndika-v-mrs-maranon-ca4-2017.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack