Wanda Burks v. James Rodger, No. 17-2199 (4th Cir. 2018)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 17-2199 WANDA J. BURKS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. JAMES RODGER, Norfolk Neighborhood Development; CLEVE CHAPPELL; DAVID FIRNSTALH; JOSH HAIGHT; RONALD LEE; NORFOLK REDEVELOPMENT AND HOUSING AUTHORITY, Renovation Department, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Mark S. Davis, District Judge. (2:17-cv-00390-MSD-RJK) Submitted: February 15, 2018 Decided: February 16, 2018 Before WILKINSON, FLOYD, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Wanda J. Burks, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Wanda J. Burks appeals the district court’s order dismissing her civil action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3). * We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Burks v. Rodger, No. 2:17-cv-00390-MSD-RJK (E.D. Va. Sept. 13, 2017). 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 * Although the district court dismissed the action without prejudice, the district court’s order is a final appealable order under Goode v. Cent. Va. Legal Aid Soc’y, Inc., 807 F.3d 619, 623 (4th Cir. 2015), and Martin v. Duffy, 858 F.3d 239, 247 (4th Cir. 2017) (“repeated, ineffective attempts at amendment suggest that further amendment of the complaint would be futile”). 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.