Court Opinion

ID: 9412343
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-07-29 21:00:33.079956+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:41:09.979379
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 23-6299      Doc: 11         Filed: 07/28/2023    Pg: 1 of 2

                                            UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                              No. 23-6299

        WILLIAM I. MARABLE, JR.,

                            Plaintiff - Appellant,

                     v.

        MECKLENBURG COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT,

                            Defendant - Appellee.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
        Alexandria. Rossie David Alston, Jr., District Judge. (1:23-cv-00269-RDA-LRV)

        Submitted: July 25, 2023                                          Decided: July 28, 2023

        Before WYNN and HEYTENS, Circuit Judges, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judge.

        Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        William I. Marable, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 23-6299         Doc: 11      Filed: 07/28/2023      Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               William I. Marable, Jr., appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C.

        § 1983 complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b). On appeal, we confine our review to the

        issues raised in the informal brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Marable’s informal brief

        does not challenge the basis for the district court’s disposition, he 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 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