Tornello Fontaine v. City of Charlotte, No. 11-2125 (4th Cir. 2012)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 11-2125 TORNELLO FONTAINE, pierce el-bey Grantor Washitaw Dugdahmoundyah Muur s Grantor/In Propria Persona, de Plaintiff - Appellant, v. CITY OF CHARLOTTE; CHARLOTTE MECKLENBURG POLICE DEPARTMENT; T. BOBREK; JOHN DOE, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Robert J. Conrad, Jr., Chief District Judge. (3:11-cv-00131-RJC-DCK) Submitted: February 9, 2012 Decided: February 13, 2012 Before WILKINSON, AGEE, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Noble Tornello Fontaine Pierce El-Bey, Appellant Pro Se. Richard Rustin Perlungher, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG POLICE DEPARTMENT, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Tornello Fontaine appeals the district court s order accepting granting the recommendation Defendants motion § 1983 (2006) complaint. no reversible error. stated by the Charlotte, No. of to the dismiss magistrate judge Fontaine s 42 and U.S.C. We have reviewed the record and find Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons district court. See 3:11-cv-00131-RJC-DCK Fontaine (W.D.N.C. v. Oct. City 7, of 2011). Further, we deny Fontaine s motion for sanctions and for a grand jury trial and, accordingly, deny as moot Defendants-Appellees motion to strike Fontaine s motion. 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 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.