Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Renee Ferebee v. Sheehy Ford Dealership, 17-2313 (2018)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 17-2313 Visitors: 11
Filed: Apr. 02, 2018
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 17-2313 MS. RENEE (COG) FEREBEE, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. SHEEHY FORD DEALERSHIP, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Paula Xinis, District Judge. (8:16-cv-03142-PX) Submitted: March 29, 2018 Decided: April 2, 2018 Before AGEE and DIAZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Renee Ferebee, Appell
More
                                    UNPUBLISHED

                       UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                           FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT


                                      No. 17-2313


MS. RENEE (COG) FEREBEE,

                    Plaintiff - Appellant,

             v.

SHEEHY FORD DEALERSHIP,

                    Defendant - Appellee.



Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt.
Paula Xinis, District Judge. (8:16-cv-03142-PX)


Submitted: March 29, 2018                                         Decided: April 2, 2018


Before AGEE and DIAZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.


Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


Renee Ferebee, Appellant Pro Se.


Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:

      Renee (COG) Ferebee appeals the district court’s order dismissing for lack of

subject matter jurisdiction her civil action against Defendant Sheehy Ford Dealership.

On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the Appellant’s brief. See 4th

Cir. R. 34(b). Because Ferebee’s informal brief does not challenge the basis for the

district court’s disposition, Ferebee 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

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer