Adria Crump v. Samuel Cherry; Mary Elizabeth Watkins; Quinn Broock

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 20-1085

ADRIA CRUMP,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

SAMUEL CHERRY; MARY ELIZABETH WATKINS; QUINN BROOCK,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore.
Richard D. Bennett, District Judge. (1:19-cv-00786-RDB)

Submitted: April 14, 2020 Decided: April 17, 2020

Before WILKINSON, QUATTLEBAUM, and RUSHING, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed as modified by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Adria Crump, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

2

PER CURIAM:

Adria Crump appeals the district court’s order dismissing her civil action for lack
of subject matter jurisdiction. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.
Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Crump v. Cherry, No.
1:19-cv-00786-RDB (D. Md. Jan. 15, 2020). However, because the dismissal was for lack
of subject matter jurisdiction, we modify the judgment to reflect that the dismissal 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 . . . [a] defect in
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