Susan Matousek v. State of North Carolina
This text of Susan Matousek v. State of North Carolina (Susan Matousek v. State of North Carolina) 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UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 18-2025
SUSAN NEAL MATOUSEK,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA; ROBERT ANDREW WOMBLE; CRYSTAL OWEN; J. C. FERRELL; LT. WARD; DANIELLE TAYLOR; A. L. OWEN; DEPUTY PUHAC; COURTNEY CHROMER; CAPTAIN YOUNG; LEE MALCO; JUDY WATERFIELD,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District Judge. (2:18-cv-00448-RAJ-LRL)
Submitted: April 19, 2019 Decided: May 16, 2019
Before DIAZ and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Susan Neal Matousek, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:
Susan Neal Matousek appeals the district court’s order dismissing her civil
action. * On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the Appellant’s brief.
See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Matousek’s informal briefs and other documents filed on
appeal do not challenge the bases for the district court’s disposition, Matousek has
forfeited appellate review of the court’s order. See Jackson v. Lightsey, 775 F.3d 170,
177 (4th Cir. 2014) (“The informal brief is an important document; under Fourth Circuit
rules, our review is limited to issues preserved in that brief.”). Accordingly, we grant
Matousek’s motion to seal medical and personal information, deny her motion to show
cause, deny her petition for initial hearing en banc, and 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
* We conclude that the district court’s order dismissing Matousek’s action without prejudice is an appealable final order. See Goode v. Cent. Va. Legal Aid Soc’y, Inc., 807 F.3d 619, 623 (4th Cir. 2015).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Susan Matousek v. State of North Carolina, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/susan-matousek-v-state-of-north-carolina-ca4-2019.