Ferebee v. International House of Pancakes

Fourth Circuit

Ferebee v. International House of Pancakes

668 F. App'x 536

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedSeptember 16, 2016

DocketNo. 16-1520

StatusPublished

This text of 668 F. App'x 536 (Ferebee v. International House of Pancakes) 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

Ferebee v. International House of Pancakes, 668 F. App'x 536 (4th Cir. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Renee Ferebee appeals the district court’s order dismissing, on res judicata grounds, Ferebee’s employment discrimination action.

* On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the Appellant’s brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Ferebee does not challenge the basis for the district court’s disposition in either her informal brief or the supplement thereto. Thus, Ferebee 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, although we grant Fer-ebee leave to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis, 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

Ferebee initially filed her lawsuit in state court, but Defendant removed the action to federal court.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Renee Ferebee appeals the district court’s order dismissing, on res judicata grounds, Ferebee’s employment discrimination action.

* On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the Appellant’s brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Ferebee does not challenge the basis for the district court’s disposition in either her informal brief or the supplement thereto. Thus, Ferebee 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, although we grant Fer-ebee leave to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis, 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

Ferebee initially filed her lawsuit in state court, but Defendant removed the action to federal court.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

668 F. App'x 536, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ferebee-v-international-house-of-pancakes-ca4-2016.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack