George Moses v. David Pascoe, No. 19-6039 (4th Cir. 2019)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 19-6039 GEORGE NAPOLEON MOSES, a/k/a George N. Moses, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. DAVID M. PASCOE; WINNIFA B. CLARK; STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Orangeburg. R. Bryan Harwell, Chief District Judge. (5:18-cv-02679-RBH) Submitted: April 4, 2019 Decided: April 10, 2019 Before NIEMEYER and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. George Napoleon Moses, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: George Napoleon Moses appeals the district court’s order adopting the magistrate judge’s recommendation and dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) action with prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (2012). On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the Appellant’s brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Moses’ informal brief does not challenge the basis for the district court’s disposition, Moses 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 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.
