Miskell v. Rohrer

Fourth Circuit

Miskell v. Rohrer

606 F. App'x 99

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided June 22, 2015·No. No. 15-1250·Published

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Judy Kay Miskell appeals the district court’s order granting Defendant’s motion to strike documents she filed in her closed case. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the Appellant’s brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Miskell’s informal brief does not challenge the basis for the district court’s disposition, Miskell 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Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:

Judy Kay Miskell appeals the district court’s order granting Defendant’s motion to strike documents she filed in her closed case. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the Appellant’s brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Miskell’s informal brief does not challenge the basis for the district court’s disposition, Miskell 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.

Miskell v. Rohrer, 606 F. App'x 99 (4th Cir. 2015).

Pincite

606 F. App'x 99 (Miskell v. Rohrer) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.