Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-19-02356/USCOURTS-ca4-19-02356-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 445
Nature of Suit: Americans with Disabilities Act - Employment
Cause of Action: 

---

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 19-2356

CHARLES WIMER,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

GREENE COUNTY GENERAL CIRCUIT COURT; GREENE COUNTY 

GENERAL DISTRICT COURT; GREENE COUNTY COMMONWEALTH 

ATTORNEY’S OFFICE; GREENE COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT; 

GREENE COUNTY MAGISTRATE’S OFFICE; GREENE COUNTY CIRCUIT 

COURT CLERK’S OFFICE; GREENE COUNTY GENERAL DISTRICT COURT 

CLERK’S OFFICE; DALE DURRER; EDWIN CONSOLVO; MORGAN 

ZANDER; STEVE SMITH; JANE DOE; BARBARA BARRY; BRENDA 

GARTON; MAJOR DAVIS; BARRY LEAK,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at 

Charlottesville. Glen E. Conrad, Senior District Judge. (3:19-cv-00021-GEC)

Submitted: May 21, 2020 Decided: May 26, 2020

Before AGEE and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit 

Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

USCA4 Appeal: 19-2356 Doc: 29 Filed: 05/26/2020 Pg: 1 of 3
2

Charles Wimer, Appellant Pro Se. Blaire Hawkins O’Brien, OFFICE OF THE 

ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia; Douglas Paul Holdsworth,

JACKSON LEWIS PC, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 19-2356 Doc: 29 Filed: 05/26/2020 Pg: 2 of 3
3

PER CURIAM:

Charles Wimer appeals the district court’s order granting Defendants’ Fed. R. Civ. 

P. 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss Wimer’s civil action in which he raised failure-toaccommodate claims pursuant to the “public services” subchapter of the Americans with 

Disabilities Act, see 42 U.S.C. §§ 12131-12134 (2018), and the Rehabilitation Act, see 29 

U.S.C. § 794 (2018). On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the 

Appellant’s brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Wimer’s informal brief does not 

challenge the bases for the district court’s disposition, Wimer has forfeited appellate review 

of the court’s order. See Jackson v. Lightsey, 775 F.3d 170, 177 (4th Cir. 2014) (“The 

informal brief is an important document; under Fourth Circuit rules, our review is limited 

to issues preserved in that brief.”). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment. 

We deny Wimer’s motion to add an additional party to his case. 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

USCA4 Appeal: 19-2356 Doc: 29 Filed: 05/26/2020 Pg: 3 of 3