Background
James Reeves, proceeding pro se, brought an action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Gabriel Davis, Joshua Scallan, Dolores L. Potter, and Barney Owens in the Eastern District of North Carolina.
Reeves appealed the district court’s order granting summary judgment to Potter. He also moved in the Fourth Circuit for appointment of counsel and preparation of transcripts at government expense.
The Court’s Holding
In an unpublished per curiam opinion, the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court’s order after reviewing the record and finding no reversible error. The court limited its review to issues raised in Reeves’s informal brief and declined to consider issues raised for the first time on appeal absent exceptional circumstances.
The court also denied Reeves’s motions for appointment of counsel and transcripts at government expense. It dispensed with oral argument because the written materials adequately presented the facts and legal contentions and argument would not aid the decisional process.
Key Takeaways
- The Fourth Circuit affirmed summary judgment for Potter in Reeves’s § 1983 action.
- For a pro se appeal using an informal brief, the court confined its review to the issues presented in that brief.
- The court denied Reeves’s requests for appointed counsel and government-funded transcripts.
Why It Matters
The decision underscores the importance of identifying every appellate issue in an informal brief and preserving arguments in the district court. Because the opinion is unpublished and offers no substantive analysis of the underlying § 1983 claims, its principal significance concerns appellate procedure rather than the merits of those claims.