Der KI-Arbeitsbereich für Juristen
- Rechtsrecherche mit Zugriff auf über 1 Million Quellen
- Dokumentenautomatisierung
- Mandatsverwaltung
- Gehostet in der EU und der Schweiz
14 Tage kostenlos testen (10 Fragen/Tag während der Testphase)
Der KI-Arbeitsbereich für Juristen
14 Tage kostenlos testen (10 Fragen/Tag während der Testphase)
15-1300•Carolyn E. Reed-Smith v. Spartanburg County School District Seven
15-1300Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit21.05.2015
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 15-1300
CAROLYN E. REED-SMITH,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
SPARTANBURG COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT SEVEN,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Spartanburg. J. Michelle Childs, District
Judge. (7:11-cv-00970-JMC)
Submitted: May 19, 2015 Decided: May 21, 2015
Before NIEMEYER and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Carolyn E. Reed-Smith, Appellant Pro Se. Carlos C. Johnson,
Kenneth William Nettles, Jr., LYLES DARR & CLARK, LLP,
Spartanburg, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Carolyn E. Reed-Smith appeals the district court’s order
denying her Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion. On appeal, we confine
our review to the issues raised in the Appellant’s brief.
See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Reed-Smith’s informal brief does
not challenge the basis for the district court’s disposition,
Reed-Smith has forfeited appellate review of the court’s order.
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 of 2 --
Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.