Jones v. Housing Authority

Fourth Circuit

Jones v. Housing Authority

589 F. App'x 190

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedJanuary 20, 2015

DocketNo. 14-2179

StatusPublished

This text of 589 F. App'x 190 (Jones v. Housing Authority) 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

Jones v. Housing Authority, 589 F. App'x 190 (4th Cir. 2015).

Pincite

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Mitchell Jones appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment to Defendant in Jones’ housing discrimina[191]*191tion suit. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the Appellant’s brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Jones’ informal brief does not challenge the basis for the district court’s disposition, Jones 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Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:

Mitchell Jones appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment to Defendant in Jones’ housing discrimina[191]*191tion suit. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the Appellant’s brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Jones’ informal brief does not challenge the basis for the district court’s disposition, Jones 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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

589 F. App'x 190, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jones-v-housing-authority-ca4-2015.