Childress v. First Citizens Bank

Fourth Circuit

Childress v. First Citizens Bank

540 F. App'x 157

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided September 26, 2013·No. No. 13-1886·Published

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Tessa Childress appeals the district court’s order dismissing her civil action alleging a violation of the federal Wiretap Act. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the Appellant’s brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Childress’ informal brief does not challenge the basis for the district court’s disposition, Chil-dress has forfeited appellate review of the court’s order. 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

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Tessa Childress appeals the district court’s order dismissing her civil action alleging a violation of the federal Wiretap Act. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the Appellant’s brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Childress’ informal brief does not challenge the basis for the district court’s disposition, Chil-dress has forfeited appellate review of the court’s order. 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.

Childress v. First Citizens Bank, 540 F. App'x 157 (4th Cir. 2013).

Pincite

540 F. App'x 157 (Childress v. First Citizens Bank) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.