Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-09-02348/USCOURTS-ca4-09-02348-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 

---

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-2348

WALDO FENNER,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

BILL BELL, Mayor; PATRICK BAKER; STEVEN W. CHALMERS; RONALD 

HODGE; LEE RUSS; STEPHEN MIHAICH; BEV COUNCIL; JEFF LAMB; R. 

H. SHEPHERD; B. D. REITZ; TIMOTHY STANHOPE; M. K. BOND; 

LAWRENCE CAMPBELL; MRS. SHANNON TUCKER; MRS. DANIEL BRUNO; 

MICHAEL S. FERGUSON; ORLANDO HUDSON, Judge; PAYNE, 

Magistrate; T. A. DREW, Magistrate; ANTHONY MOSS; DR. OXLEY, 

Chief Executive Officer; RENEE GORBY; ELAINE BUSHFAN, Chief 

Justice; TRACEY E. CLINE; MICHAEL NIFONG, 

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle 

District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. Thomas David 

Schroeder, District Judge. (1:08-cv-00367-TDS-DPD)

Submitted: April 22, 2010 Decided: April 26, 2010

Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, and KING and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Waldo Fenner, Appellant Pro Se. Kimberly Martin Grantham, CITY 

ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, Durham, North Carolina; David John Adinolfi, 

II, Special Deputy Attorney General, Raleigh, North Carolina;

Appeal: 09-2348 Doc: 13 Filed: 04/26/2010 Pg: 1 of 3
2

Harold Franklin Askins, Dorothy Powers, NORTH CAROLINA 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 09-2348 Doc: 13 Filed: 04/26/2010 Pg: 2 of 3
3

PER CURIAM:

Waldo Fenner appeals the district court’s order 

accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge, as 

modified, and dismissing his civil rights action. We have 

reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, 

we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. 

Fenner v. Bell, No. 1:08-cv-00367-TDS-DPD (M.D.N.C. Nov. 13, 

2009). 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.

AFFIRMED

Appeal: 09-2348 Doc: 13 Filed: 04/26/2010 Pg: 3 of 3