Keenan Barry v. Unknown, No. 20-6036 (4th Cir. 2020)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 20-6036 KEENAN BARRY, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. UNKNOWN, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Henry E. Hudson, Senior District Judge. (3:19-cv-00723-HEH-RCY) Submitted: August 26, 2020 Decided: September 10, 2020 Before WILKINSON, HARRIS, and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Keenan Barry, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Keenan Barry appeals the district court’s order dismissing without prejudice his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint for failure to comply with the magistrate judge’s order to pay an initial partial filing fee or to aver that he could not pay such a fee. * On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the informal brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Barry’s informal brief does not challenge the basis for the district court’s disposition, he 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 * Because the district court dismissed Barry’s action “for procedural reasons unrelated to the contents of the pleadings,” we have jurisdiction over this appeal. Goode v. Cent. Va. Legal Aid Soc’y, Inc., 807 F.3d 619, 624 (4th Cir. 2015); see Bing v. Brivo Sys., LLC, 959 F.3d 605, 611-12 (4th Cir. 2020) (discussing factors courts consider in determining whether order is final and appealable). 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.