Redmond Howard v. Daryl McCready
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to supplement [1000251143-2]; denying Motion to strike [1000257282-2]. Originating case number: 1:17-cv-00385-GLR. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000302109]. Mailed to: Redmond Howard. [18-1016, 18-1092]
Appeal: 18-1016
Doc: 30
Filed: 05/29/2018
Pg: 1 of 3
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 18-1016
REDMOND HOWARD,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
DARYL MCCREADY, Senior Pastor at Sonrise Church (Berlin); BRYAN
MATTHEW LLOYD, Pastor at Salisbury, MD Sonrise Church; MARK AARON
THOMAS, Pastor at Princess Anne, MD Sonrise Church; MICHAEL DUANE
RITTENHOUSE; JARED MYLON RITTENHOUSE,
Defendants - Appellees.
No. 18-1092
REDMOND HOWARD,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
DARYL MCCREADY, Senior Pastor at Sonrise Church (Berlin); BRYAN
MATTHEW LLOYD, Pastor at Salisbury, MD Sonrise Church; MARK AARON
THOMAS, Pastor at Princess Anne, MD Sonrise Church; MICHAEL DUANE
RITTENHOUSE; JARED MYLON RITTENHOUSE,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore.
George L. Russell, III, District Judge. (1:17-cv-00385-GLR)
Appeal: 18-1016
Doc: 30
Filed: 05/29/2018
Pg: 2 of 3
Submitted: May 24, 2018
Decided: May 29, 2018
Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Redmond Howard, Appellant Pro Se. Robin Ringgold Cockey, COCKEY, BRENNAN
& MALONEY, PC, Salisbury, Maryland; Erin Hebert Cancienne, DECARO, DORAN,
SICILIANO, GALLAGHER & DEBLASIS, LLP, Bowie, Maryland, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2
Appeal: 18-1016
Doc: 30
Filed: 05/29/2018
Pg: 3 of 3
PER CURIAM:
In these consolidated cases, Redmond Howard appeals the district court’s order
dismissing his second amended civil complaint for failure to state a claim. On appeal, we
confine our review to the issues raised in the Appellant’s brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b).
Because Howard’s informal brief does not challenge the basis for the district court’s
disposition, Howard 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 deny as unnecessary both Howard’s motion to file
supplemental materials and Appellees’ motion to strike the proposed supplemental
materials. 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?