Wilkins v. Johnson

Fourth Circuit

Wilkins v. Johnson

589 F. App'x 191

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedJanuary 20, 2015

DocketNo. 14-2203

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 589 F. App'x 191 (Wilkins v. Johnson) 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

Wilkins v. Johnson, 589 F. App'x 191 (4th Cir. 2015).

Pincite

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Willette Wilkins appeals the district court’s order adopting the magistrate judge’s recommendation and dismissing her complaint alleging disability discrimination for failure to state a claim. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6). On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the Appellant’s brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Wilkins’ informal brief does not challenge the basis for the district court’s disposition, Wilkins has forfeited appellate review of the court’s order. Accordingly, we deny Wilkins’ motion to schedule oral argument 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.

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Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:

Willette Wilkins appeals the district court’s order adopting the magistrate judge’s recommendation and dismissing her complaint alleging disability discrimination for failure to state a claim. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6). On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the Appellant’s brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Wilkins’ informal brief does not challenge the basis for the district court’s disposition, Wilkins has forfeited appellate review of the court’s order. Accordingly, we deny Wilkins’ motion to schedule oral argument 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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

589 F. App'x 191, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wilkins-v-johnson-ca4-2015.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack