Hill v. Hawks

Fourth Circuit

Hill v. Hawks

515 F. App'x 234

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedMarch 29, 2013

DocketNo. 13-1028

StatusPublished

This text of 515 F. App'x 234 (Hill v. Hawks) 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

Hill v. Hawks, 515 F. App'x 234 (4th Cir. 2013).

Pincite

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Cora M. Hill appeals the district court’s orders dismissing her civil action for failure to establish a proper basis for jurisdiction over any of the named Defendants and denying reconsideration of those orders. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the Appellant’s brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Hill’s informal brief does not challenge the bases for the district court’s dispositions, Hill has forfeited appellate review of the court’s orders. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed on appeal in forma pau-peris, we affirm the district court’s judgments. 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Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:

Cora M. Hill appeals the district court’s orders dismissing her civil action for failure to establish a proper basis for jurisdiction over any of the named Defendants and denying reconsideration of those orders. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the Appellant’s brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Hill’s informal brief does not challenge the bases for the district court’s dispositions, Hill has forfeited appellate review of the court’s orders. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed on appeal in forma pau-peris, we affirm the district court’s judgments. 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)

515 F. App'x 234, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hill-v-hawks-ca4-2013.