Vanover v. Hirsch

Fourth Circuit

Vanover v. Hirsch

584 F. App'x 80

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedSeptember 30, 2014

DocketNo. 14-6765

StatusPublished

This text of 584 F. App'x 80 (Vanover v. Hirsch) 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

Vanover v. Hirsch, 584 F. App'x 80 (4th Cir. 2014).

Pincite

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Johnny M. Vanover appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing Vanover’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) civil rights complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b) (2012). On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the Appellant’s brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Vanover does not challenge the basis for the district court’s disposition in his informal briefs, Vanover 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Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:

Johnny M. Vanover appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing Vanover’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) civil rights complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b) (2012). On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the Appellant’s brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Vanover does not challenge the basis for the district court’s disposition in his informal briefs, Vanover 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)

584 F. App'x 80, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/vanover-v-hirsch-ca4-2014.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack