U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 2013

Alice Deane v. Marshalls, Inc.

Alice Deane v. Marshalls, Inc.
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Decided April 22, 2013

Alice Deane v. Marshalls, Inc.

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-2577

ALICE M. DEANE, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. MARSHALLS, INC.; AMERICAN CASUALTY CO. OF READING, PA, Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Harrisonburg. Michael F. Urbanski, District Judge. (5:11-cv-00135-MFU-BWC)

Submitted: April 18, 2013 Decided: April 22, 2013

Before WILKINSON, GREGORY, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Alice M. Deane, Appellant Pro Se. Lawrence Philip Postol, SEYFARTH SHAW, LLP, Washington, D.C.; Charles Garrison Meyer, III, LECLAIR RYAN, PC, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM: Alice M. Deane appeals the district court’s order adopting the report of the magistrate judge and dismissing her employment discrimination suit for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the Appellant’s brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Deane does not challenge in her informal brief the basis for the district court’s disposition, she 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

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.