Filed: Mar. 20, 2015
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-6098 EDWARD REESE, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. JEANINE SLATER; DR. MATTIOLI; MS. LARKEN, Defendants – Appellees, and KIERAN J. SHANAHAN; REUBEN YOUNG; W. DAVID GUICE; GEORGE T. SOLOMON; CARL JOYNER; CYNTHIA THORNTON; FRANK PERRY, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge. (5:13-ct-03126-BO) Submitted: March 17, 2015 Decide
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-6098 EDWARD REESE, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. JEANINE SLATER; DR. MATTIOLI; MS. LARKEN, Defendants – Appellees, and KIERAN J. SHANAHAN; REUBEN YOUNG; W. DAVID GUICE; GEORGE T. SOLOMON; CARL JOYNER; CYNTHIA THORNTON; FRANK PERRY, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge. (5:13-ct-03126-BO) Submitted: March 17, 2015 Decided..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 15-6098
EDWARD REESE,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
JEANINE SLATER; DR. MATTIOLI; MS. LARKEN,
Defendants – Appellees,
and
KIERAN J. SHANAHAN; REUBEN YOUNG; W. DAVID GUICE; GEORGE T.
SOLOMON; CARL JOYNER; CYNTHIA THORNTON; FRANK PERRY,
Defendants.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle,
District Judge. (5:13-ct-03126-BO)
Submitted: March 17, 2015 Decided: March 20, 2015
Before WILKINSON and KING, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Edward Reese, Appellant Pro Se. Kimberly D. Grande, NORTH
CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina; Nathan
Douglas Childs, Elizabeth Pharr McCullough, YOUNG MOORE &
HENDERSON, PA, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2
PER CURIAM:
Edward Reese appeals the district court’s order dismissing
without prejudice his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) civil rights
action for failure to exhaust his available administrative
remedies. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised
in the Appellant’s brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because
Reese’s informal brief does not challenge the basis for the
district court’s disposition, Reese has forfeited appellate
review of the court’s order. 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
3