Filed: Jan. 08, 2019
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-1892 TERRIDA MONROE, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. VICTORIA FIRE & CASUALTY, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. John A. Gibney, Jr., District Judge. (3:18-cv-00425-JAG) Submitted: November 19, 2018 Decided: January 8, 2019 Before MOTZ and DIAZ, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Terrida
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-1892 TERRIDA MONROE, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. VICTORIA FIRE & CASUALTY, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. John A. Gibney, Jr., District Judge. (3:18-cv-00425-JAG) Submitted: November 19, 2018 Decided: January 8, 2019 Before MOTZ and DIAZ, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Terrida M..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 18-1892
TERRIDA MONROE,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
VICTORIA FIRE & CASUALTY,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
Richmond. John A. Gibney, Jr., District Judge. (3:18-cv-00425-JAG)
Submitted: November 19, 2018 Decided: January 8, 2019
Before MOTZ and DIAZ, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Terrida Monroe, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Terrida Monroe appeals the district court’s order dismissing her civil complaint.
On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the Appellant’s brief. See 4th
Cir. R. 34(b). Because Monroe’s informal brief does not challenge the bases for the
district court’s disposition, Monroe 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 the court and argument would not aid the
decisional process.
AFFIRMED
2