Johnson v. Johnson

Full title: CLINTON D. JOHNSON, JR., a/k/a Kayzon Ru, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. SGT…

Court: United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

Date published: Jan 20, 2023

No. 22-7016 (4th Cir. Jan. 20, 2023)

Opinion

22-7016

01-20-2023

CLINTON D. JOHNSON, JR., a/k/a Kayzon Ru, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. SGT. JOHNSON, City of Conway Police Department Officer; ALLAN G. HUGGINS, II, City of Conway Police Department Officer; LT. ANDERSON, J. Reuben Long Detention Employee; OFFICER COSTELLO, J. Reuben Long Detention Employee; OFFICER STRICKLAND; OFFICER FOUTZ, Defendants - Appellees.

Clinton D. Johnson, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Leslie A. Cotter, Jr., Carmen Vaughn Ganjehsani, RICHARDSON PLOWDEN &ROBINSON, PA, Columbia, South Carolina; J.W. Nelson Chandler, CHANDLER &DUDGEON LLC, Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellees.

PER CURIAM:

UNPUBLISHED

Submitted: January 17, 2023

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. Sherri A. Lydon, District Judge. (4:20-cv-01664-SAL)

Clinton D. Johnson, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.

Leslie A. Cotter, Jr., Carmen Vaughn Ganjehsani, RICHARDSON PLOWDEN &ROBINSON, PA, Columbia, South Carolina; J.W. Nelson Chandler, CHANDLER &DUDGEON LLC, Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellees.

Before KING and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Clinton D. Johnson, Jr., appeals the district court's order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge, dismissing two defendants for failure to effect service upon on them, and awarding summary judgment to the remaining defendants on Johnson's claims alleged in his amended 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the informal brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Johnson's informal brief and other appellate filings do not challenge the bases 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. 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