Samuel Whatley, II v. Southern Seasons Heating & Air Conditioning

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

Samuel Whatley, II v. Southern Seasons Heating & Air Conditioning

Opinion

USCA4 Appeal: 24-1606 Doc: 5 Filed: 10/15/2024 Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 24-1606

SAMUEL T. WHATLEY, II; REVEREND DR. SAMUEL T. WHATLEY; PACITA WHATLEY,

Plaintiffs - Appellants,

v.

SOUTHERN SEASONS HEATING & AIR CONDITIONING; CLAUDE MCALHANY, Owner; NORTH CHARLESTON POLICE DEPARTMENT,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. Richard Mark Gergel, District Judge. (2:22-cv-04364-RMG)

Submitted: October 10, 2024 Decided: October 15, 2024

Before WILKINSON and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Samuel T. Whatley, II; Samuel T. Whatley; Pacita D. Whatley, Appellants Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 24-1606 Doc: 5 Filed: 10/15/2024 Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:

Samuel T. Whatley, II, Reverend Dr. Samuel T. Whatley, and Pacita D. Whatley

appeal the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and

dismissing their amended complaint for lack of standing, lack of subject matter jurisdiction,

and failure to state a claim. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the

informal brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because the Whatleys’s informal brief does not

challenge the bases for the district court’s disposition, they have 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

Reference

Status
Unpublished