Williams v. Christenson
This text of 593 F. App'x 231 (Williams v. Christenson) 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
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Charles A. Williams appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the Appellant’s brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Williams does not challenge in his informal brief the basis for the district court’s disposition, he 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
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
593 F. App'x 231, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/williams-v-christenson-ca4-2015.