Tigress McDaniel v. Charlotte Mecklenburg Black Political Caucus

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedMay 23, 2023
Docket23-1051
StatusUnpublished

This text of Tigress McDaniel v. Charlotte Mecklenburg Black Political Caucus (Tigress McDaniel v. Charlotte Mecklenburg Black Political Caucus) 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
Tigress McDaniel v. Charlotte Mecklenburg Black Political Caucus, (4th Cir. 2023).

Opinion

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UNPUBLISHED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Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

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

Related

Michael Willner v. James Dimon
849 F.3d 93 (Fourth Circuit, 2017)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Tigress McDaniel v. Charlotte Mecklenburg Black Political Caucus, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tigress-mcdaniel-v-charlotte-mecklenburg-black-political-caucus-ca4-2023.