Barrett v. USA-Social Security

Fourth Circuit

Barrett v. USA-Social Security

539 F. App'x 289

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedSeptember 26, 2013

DocketNo. 13-1589

StatusPublished

This text of 539 F. App'x 289 (Barrett v. USA-Social Security) 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

Barrett v. USA-Social Security, 539 F. App'x 289 (4th Cir. 2013).

Pincite

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

William Leslie Barrett, Sr., appeals the district court’s orders dismissing his civil complaint for failure to state a claim and denying his motion for reconsideration. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the Appellant’s brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Barrett’s informal brief does not challenge the basis for the district court’s disposition, Barrett has forfeited appellate review of the court’s orders. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Barrett v. United States, No. 5:10-cv-00469-BO (E.D.N.C. Feb. 20, 2013; Apr. 24, 2013). 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

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

William Leslie Barrett, Sr., appeals the district court’s orders dismissing his civil complaint for failure to state a claim and denying his motion for reconsideration. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the Appellant’s brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Barrett’s informal brief does not challenge the basis for the district court’s disposition, Barrett has forfeited appellate review of the court’s orders. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Barrett v. United States, No. 5:10-cv-00469-BO (E.D.N.C. Feb. 20, 2013; Apr. 24, 2013). 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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

539 F. App'x 289, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/barrett-v-usa-social-security-ca4-2013.