¶1 Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
¶2 Ricky Lee appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his second amended 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) *146 complaint. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the Appellant’s brief. See 4th Cir. Rule 34(b). Lee’s brief alleges no error committed by the district court, but rather asserts several claims of ineffective assistance of counsel. A litigant in a civil action, however, has no constitutional or statutory right to effective assistance of counsel. The appropriate remedy for such a claim is a malpractice suit. * See Glick v. Henderson, 855 F.2d 536, 541 (8th Cir.1988); MacCuish v. United States, 844 F.2d 733, 735-36 (10th Cir.1988). Accordingly, we affirm the order of the district court. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
¶3 AFFIRMED.