Ballard v. Buchanan

655 F. App'x 167
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedJuly 22, 2016
DocketNo. 16-6417
StatusPublished

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

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Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

Related

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
655 F. App'x 167, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ballard-v-buchanan-ca4-2016.