Ralph Stewart, Jr. v. VCU

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 3:09-cv-00738-HEH-DJN Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998949317]. Mailed to: Ralph Stewart, Jr.. [12-1594]

Appeal: 12-1594

Doc: 12

Filed: 10/01/2012

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-1594

RALPH STEWART, JR.,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
VCU HEALTH
System”,

SYSTEM

AUTHORITY,

formerly

“VCU/VCU

Health

Defendant - Appellee,
and
VIRGINIA COMMONWEALTH UNIVERSITY; VCU/VCU HEALTH SYSTEM;
VCU MEDICAL CENTER/MEDICAL COLLEGE OF VIRGINIA FOUNDATION;
MCV/MCV PHYSICIANS; MCV HOSPITALS AUTHORITY; JOHN DUVAL;
MARIA CURRAN; DONNA STEIGLEDER; MARIE GREENWOOD; SHARON
JAHN; DEBORAH SLAYDEN; PETER RING; DUANE JACKSON; TERI
KUTTENKULER; DAVID HOULETTE; ANTOINETTE LIGHT,
Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond.
Henry E. Hudson, District
Judge. (3:09-cv-00738-HEH-DJN)

Submitted:

September 21, 2012

Decided:

Before KING, DAVIS, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

October 1, 2012

Appeal: 12-1594

Doc: 12

Filed: 10/01/2012

Pg: 2 of 3

Ralph Stewart, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Gregory Clayton Fleming,
Senior Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia; Lynn
Forgrieve Jacob, WILLIAMS MULLEN, Richmond, Virginia; Sara Berg
Rafal, WILLIAMS MULLEN, Virginia Beach, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

2

Appeal: 12-1594

Doc: 12

Filed: 10/01/2012

Pg: 3 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Ralph Stewart, Jr., appeals the district court’s order
granting

the

Virginia

Commonwealth

University

Health

System

Authority’s petition for attorney’s fees and ordering that he
pay attorney’s fees in the amount of $28,547.25 as a sanction
for

his

failure

to

comply

with

the

rules

of

discovery.

On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the
appellant’s brief.

See 4th Cir. R. 34(b).

Because Stewart’s

informal brief does not challenge the basis for the district
court’s disposition, Stewart has forfeited appellate review of
the court’s order.
judgment.
legal
before

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and

contentions
the

Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s

court

are

adequately

and

argument

presented

would

not

in
aid

the
the

materials
decisional

process.

AFFIRMED

3