Ballard v. Buchanan

655 F. App'x 167
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided July 22, 2016·No. No. 16-6417·Published

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Mark Wayne Ballard appeals the district court’s order denying the postjudgment motion for miscellaneous relief that Ballard filed in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) action. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the Appellant’s brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Ballard’s informal brief does not challenge the basis for the district court’s disposition, Ballard has forfeited appellate review of the court’s order. See Williams v. Giant Food Inc., 370 F.3d 423, 430 n.4 (4th Cir. 2004). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment. 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

Ballard v. Buchanan, 655 F. App'x 167 (4th Cir. 2016).

655 F. App'x 167 (Ballard v. Buchanan) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Williams v. Giant Food Inc.
370 F.3d 423 (Fourth Circuit, 2004)