# Don Brown v. Stephen Dunnigan

> Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · November 24, 2020

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/4635873

## Case

- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
- **Decided:** November 24, 2020
- **Precedential status:** Unpublished
- **Opinion:** Opinion
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/4635873

## Opinion text

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 20-6886

DON BROWN,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

STEPHEN ALAN DUNNIGAN, Attorney,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
Norfolk. Arenda L. Wright Allen, District Judge. (2:18-cv-00666-AWA-RJK)

Submitted: November 16, 2020 Decided: November 24, 2020

Before NIEMEYER and KING, Circuit Judges, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Don Brown, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

Don Brown appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983

complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). On appeal, we confine our review to the

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

∗
Brown’s informal brief raises several new issues, which we decline to consider.
See Hicks v. Ferreyra, 965 F.3d 302, 310 (4th Cir. 2020). (“It is well established that this
court does not consider issues raised for the first time on appeal, absent exceptional
circumstances.” (alterations and internal quotation marks omitted)).

2

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/4635873. Public record. Not legal advice.