Jermaine M. Capel v. City of Norfolk

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 24-1437
JERMAINE M. CAPEL,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
CITY OF NORFOLK; CITY OF CHESAPEAKE; VIRGINIA EMPLOYMENT
COMMISSION; VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF CHILD SUPPORT
ENFORCEMENT; JUDGE HOGGE; JUDGE PAIGE; JUDGE SIMMONS;
JUDGE JONES; HEATHER NEWTON, Clerk of Court General District Court;
NORFOLK POLICE OFFICER LEPESKI/GOLDSMITH; NORFOLK POLICE
OFFICER BARON; CARLETHIA DURHAM; FRANK HARRIS, III; J.
CALDWELL; SHERIFF WILLOUGHBY; SHERIFF CHERRY; JUDGE MARY
JANE HALL; JUDGE WILLIAMS,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
Norfolk. Arenda L. Wright Allen, District Judge. (2:22-cv-00486-AWA-LRL)
Submitted: October 30, 2025 Decided: November 3, 2025
Before RUSHING and BENJAMIN, Circuit Judges, and KEENAN, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Jermaine M. Capel, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Jermaine M. Capel appeals the district court’s order dismissing his civil action
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) for failure to state a claim. On appeal, we confine
our review to the issues raised in the informal brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Capel’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.”). Specifically, Capel has not
challenged on appeal the district court’s conclusion that his amended complaint fails to
state a plausible claim and that he failed to comply with the court’s show cause order.
Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment. Capel v. City of Norfolk, No. 2:22-
cv-00486-AWA-LRL (E.D. Va. Apr. 26, 2024). 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 --