Daniel Lanahan v. Patuxent Institution


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:15-cv-02511-JFM Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000107713]. Mailed to: appellant. [17-6591]

Download PDF
Appeal: 17-6591 Doc: 11 Filed: 06/27/2017 Pg: 1 of 2 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 17-6591 DANIEL THOMAS LANAHAN, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. PATUXENT INSTITUTION; TANIKA AMASON; CORRECTIONAL OFFICER ANDERSON; UNKNOWN OFFICERS; WARDEN; ASSISTANT WARDEN; STATE OF MARYLAND; MENTAL HEALTH MANAGEMENT COMPANY; DOCTOR MOGHE, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. J. Frederick Motz, Senior District Judge. (1:15-cv-02511-JFM) Submitted: June 22, 2017 Decided: June 27, 2017 Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and FLOYD and HARRIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Daniel Thomas Lanahan, Appellant Pro Se. Stephanie Judith Lane-Weber, Assistant Attorney General, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 17-6591 Doc: 11 Filed: 06/27/2017 Pg: 2 of 2 PER CURIAM: Daniel Thomas Lanahan appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for appointment of counsel, declining to appoint a guardian ad litem, and dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) civil action as barred by the statute of limitations. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the Appellant’s brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Lanahan’s informal brief does not challenge the bases for the district court’s rulings, Lanahan 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 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 2

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?