Case Name: Adrian Lemont MCFADDEN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Linda G. DAVIS, Chief of Police; C.Y. Singletary, Police Officer; David Woodward, Enforcement Agent; E. Norris Tolson, Secretary of Revenue, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-10-14
Citations: 333 F. App'x 728
Docket Number: No. 08-8009
Parties: Adrian Lemont MCFADDEN, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. Linda G. DAVIS, Chief of Police; C.Y. Singletary, Police Officer; David Woodward, Enforcement Agent; E. Norris Tolson, Secretary of Revenue, Defendants—Appellees.
Judges: Before WILKINSON and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 333
Pages: 728–729

Head Matter:
Adrian Lemont MCFADDEN, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. Linda G. DAVIS, Chief of Police; C.Y. Singletary, Police Officer; David Woodward, Enforcement Agent; E. Norris Tolson, Secretary of Revenue, Defendants—Appellees.
No. 08-8009.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Sept. 28, 2009.
Decided: Oct. 14, 2009.
Adrian Lemont McFadden, Appellant Pro Se. James R. Morgan, Jr., Robert T. Numbers, II, Womble, Carlyle, Sandridge & Rice, PLLC, Winston-Salem, North Carolina; Michael D. Youth, Assistant Attorney General, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees.
Before WILKINSON and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Adrian Lemont McFadden appeals the district court's orders accepting the recommendations of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. McFadden v. Davis, No. 1:06-cv-00483-JAB-WWD, 2008 WL 4191011 (M.D.N.C. Sept. 3, 2008). 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.