Nedra Carr-Stephenson v. OfficeMax North America, Inc.
Nedra Carr-Stephenson v. OfficeMax North America, Inc.
Opinion
ON REHEARING
Nedra Carr-Stephenson appeals the district court’s order granting Defendant’s motion to dismiss 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 Carr-Stephenson 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. Id. 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.
PANEL REHEARING GRANTED; EN BANC REHEARING DENIED; AFFIRMED.
In an opinion issued on March 31, 2014, we dismissed Carr-Stephenson's appeal for lack of jurisdiction on the ground that her notice of appeal was untimely filed. Carr-Stephenson then filed a petition for en banc rehearing that persuades us she timely filed a notice of appeal that did not appeár in the electronic record. Accordingly, although we deny Carr-Stephenson’s petition for rehearing en banc, we grant panel rehearing, and conclude that Carr-Stephenson did in fact file a timely notice of appeal. Accordingly, we vacate the prior opinion and issue this opinion in its stead.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.