Sean Terry v. Swift Transportation, No. 19-1346 (4th Cir. 2019)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 19-1346 SEAN V. TERRY, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. SWIFT TRANSPORTATION, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. N. Carlton Tilley, Jr., Senior District Judge. (1:16-cv-00256-NCT-LPA) Submitted: June 13, 2019 Decided: June 17, 2019 Before WYNN and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Sean V. Terry, Appellant Pro Se. Alexander L. Maultsby, Kip D. Nelson, FOX ROTHSCHILD LLP, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Sean V. Terry appeals the district court’s orders granting summary judgment to the defendant on his defamation claim and dismissing his remaining claims. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the Appellant’s brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Under a liberal construction of his informal brief, Terry challenges the district court’s ruling that his defamation claim was time-barred. We have reviewed this claim and find no reversible error, so we affirm the denial of relief on the defamation claim for the reasons stated by the district court. Terry v. Swift Transp., No. 1:16-cv-00256-NCT-LPA (M.D.N.C. Mar. 6, 2019). Turning to the remaining claims, we conclude that Terry’s informal brief does not challenge the bases for the district court’s dispositive rulings. Therefore, Terry has forfeited appellate review of those claims. 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.”). Finally, “[i]ssues raised for the first time on appeal are generally not considered absent exceptional circumstances.” Williams v. Prof’l Transp. Inc., 294 F.3d 607, 614 (4th Cir. 2002). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s dismissal of these claims. We deny Terry’s request for a district court transcript and 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
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
