Harris v. Meditran Inc./Smoke Shack

Fourth Circuit

Harris v. Meditran Inc./Smoke Shack

600 F. App'x 125

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided April 21, 2015·No. No. 15-1095·Published

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

James Cedric Harris appeals the district court’s order dismissing his civil action for lack of jurisdiction. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the Appellant’s brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Harris’ informal brief does not present argument explaining how the district court erred in its disposition, Harris 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Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:

James Cedric Harris appeals the district court’s order dismissing his civil action for lack of jurisdiction. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the Appellant’s brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Harris’ informal brief does not present argument explaining how the district court erred in its disposition, Harris 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.

Harris v. Meditran Inc./Smoke Shack, 600 F. App'x 125 (4th Cir. 2015).

Pincite

600 F. App'x 125 (Harris v. Meditran Inc./Smoke Shack) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.