History
  • No items yet
midpage
Kenny Sowell v. William Brightharp
696 F. App'x 125
| 4th Cir. | 2017
|
Check Treatment
|
Docket

*1 Before KEENAN, THACKER, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Kenny Sowell, Appellant Pro Se. Kevin Michael DeAntonio, Christopher Thomas Dorsel, Sandra J. Senn, SENN LEGAL, LLC, Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Kenny Sowell appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on 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 Sowell’s informal brief does not challenge the basis for the district court’s disposition, Sowell 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 judgment of the district court. 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

2

Case Details

Case Name: Kenny Sowell v. William Brightharp
Court Name: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Date Published: Aug 22, 2017
Citation: 696 F. App'x 125
Docket Number: 17-6725
Court Abbreviation: 4th Cir.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.