Silvester Woods v. AFLAC, No. 18-1218 (4th Cir. 2018)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-1218 SILVESTER WOODS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. AMERICAN FAMILY LIFE ASSURANCE COMPANY OF COLUMBUS, d/b/a Continental American Insurance Company, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District Judge. (1:17-cv-01449-LMB-IDD) Submitted: May 24, 2018 Decided: May 30, 2018 Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Silvester Woods, Appellant Pro Se. David Charles Numrych, LAW OFFICES OF DAVID C. NUMRYCH, PC, Washington, D.C., for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Silvester Woods appeals the district court’s order dismissing without prejudice his civil complaint alleging a breach of contract claim. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the alternative reason identified by the district court, to wit: that Woods’ medical condition—obstructive sleep apnea—was not covered under the supplemental insurance policy through which Woods sought payment, and thus his complaint failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. * See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6). See Woods v. AFLAC, No. 1:17-cv-01449-LMBIDD (E.D. Va. Feb. 1, 2018). We deny Woods’ motion for the appointment of counsel. 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 in the decisional process. AFFIRMED * We conclude that, although the complaint was dismissed without prejudice, it qualifies as a final, appealable order because Woods could not simply amend his complaint to cure this defect. See Goode v. Cent. Va. Legal Aid Soc’y, Inc., 807 F.3d 619, 629-30 (4th Cir. 2015) (holding that dismissal without prejudice is not appealable unless “the district court’s grounds for dismissal clearly indicate that no amendment could cure the complaint’s defects”). 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.
