Brandon Green v. Lindy Pendergra


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:15-cv-00147-CCE-LPA Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999902317]. Mailed to: appellant. [16-6441]

Download PDF
Appeal: 16-6441 Doc: 18 Filed: 08/02/2016 Pg: 1 of 3 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-6441 BRANDON HAMILTON GREEN, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. LINDY PENDERGRASS; JOHN SELLEW; SGT. TOMMY CRAWFORD; OFFICER KEITH FOSTER, Defendants - Appellees, and JOHN FOSTER, Jailor, Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. Catherine C. Eagles, District Judge. (1:15-cv-00147-CCE-LPA) Submitted: July 28, 2016 Before MOTZ and Circuit Judge. HARRIS, Decided: Circuit Judges, and August 2, 2016 DAVIS, Senior Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Brandon Hamilton Green, Appellant Pro Se. Sonny Sade Haynes, WOMBLE CARLYLE SANDRIDGE & RICE, PLLC, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, for Appellee. Appeal: 16-6441 Doc: 18 Filed: 08/02/2016 Pg: 2 of 3 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 Appeal: 16-6441 Doc: 18 Filed: 08/02/2016 Pg: 3 of 3 PER CURIAM: Brandon Hamilton Green appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment to the Defendants on Green’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) action. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the Appellant’s brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Green’s informal brief does not challenge the basis for the district court’s disposition, Green 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). the district court’s judgment. Accordingly, we affirm 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 3

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?