Stritzinger v. Bank of America
This text of 667 F. App'x 424 (Stritzinger v. Bank of America) 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.
Opinion
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
John Stritzinger appeals the district court’s order adopting the magistrate judge’s recommendation dismissing his complaint. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the Appellant’s brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Strit-zinger’s informal brief does not challenge the basis for the district court’s disposition, Stritzinger 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, we affirm the district court’s judgment and deny Stritzinger’s motion to appoint counsel. 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
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
667 F. App'x 424, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stritzinger-v-bank-of-america-ca4-2016.