LAW.coLAW.co

Josephat MUA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. The ONEAL LAW FIRM, LLP; Thatcher Law Firm; Sullivan, Talbott & Batt; Bryan Chapman; RMA & Associates, LLC; Robert E. Cappell; Hardnett & Associates; Bradford Associates; Pessin Katz Law, P.A.; Maryland State Education Association; Association of Supervisory & Administrative School; Maryland State Department of Education; C. Sukari Hardnett, LLC., Defendants-Appellees

United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit2016-09-16No. No. 16-1506
668 F. App'x 534

Authorities cited

No cited authorities resolved to law.co cases yet.

Opinion

majority opinion

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Josephat Mua appeals the district court’s order dismissing his civil complaint against several Defendants. On appeal, we confíne our review to the issues raised in the Appellant’s brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Mua’s informal briefs do not challenge the bases for the district court’s disposition, Mua has forfeited appellate review of the district court’s order. See Williams v. Giant Food Inc., 370 F.3d 423, 430 n.4 (4th Cir. 2004). Accordingly, although we grant Mua’s motions to exceed the length limitations for his informal brief, for leave to amend/correct his informal brief, and to supplement his amended brief, we affirm the district court’s order of dismissal. Mua v. The O’Neal Law Firm, LLP, No. 8:14-cv-02334-PJM, 2016 WL 1258469 (D. Md. Mar. 31, 2016). 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