Kess Tani v. The Washington Post, No. 08-1766 (4th Cir. 2009)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-1766 KESS TANI, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. THE WASHINGTON POST, a/k/a The Enterprise, a/k/a Southern Maryland Online, Owner/Publisher; RICK BOYD, Editor, Washington Post; JOHN C. WHARTON, Reporter, Washington Post; EDITOR(S), WASHINGTON POST; MANAGING EDITORS(S), WASHINGTON POST; CHIEF EDITOR, WASHINGTON POST; CEO, WASHINGTON POST; CFO, WASHINGTON POST; PRESIDENT, WASHINGTON POST; VICE PRESIDENT, WASHINGTON POST; OTHERS, Yet to be identified Liable Persons, Washington Post; ST. MARY S TODAY, a/k/a Island Publishing Company; KENNETH C. ROSSIGNOL, Owner/Publisher, St. Mary s Today; REPORTER(S), ST. MARY S TODAY; EDITOR(S), ST. MARY S TODAY; MANAGING EDITOR(S), ST. MARY S TODAY; CEO, ST. MARY S TODAY; CFO, ST. MARY S TODAY; PRESIDENT, ST. MARY S TODAY; VICE PRESIDENT, ST. MARY S TODAY; OTHERS, Yet to be named Liable Persons, St. Mary s Today; THEBAYNET; SEAN RICE, Owner/Publisher, TheBayNet; REPORTER(S), THEBAYNET; EDITOR(S), THEBAYNET; MANAGING EDITOR(S), THEBAYNET; CHIEF EDITOR, THEBAYNET; CEO, THEBAYNET; CFO, THEBAYNET; PRESIDENT, THEBAYNET; VICE PRESIDENT, THEBAYNET; OTHERS, Yet to be identified Liable Persons, TheBayNet; SHARON BELL; ANNA BEDFORD-DAVIS; JOSHUA DAVIS; CHRISTOPHER NORRIS, Defendants - Appellees. No. 09-1763 KESS TANI, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. THE WASHINGTON POST, a/k/a The Enterprise, a/k/a Southern Maryland Online, Owner/Publisher; RICK BOYD, Editor, Washington Post; JOHN C. WHARTON, Reporter, Washington Post; EDITOR(S), WASHINGTON POST; MANAGING EDITORS(S), WASHINGTON POST; CHIEF EDITOR, WASHINGTON POST; CEO, WASHINGTON POST; CFO, WASHINGTON POST; PRESIDENT, WASHINGTON POST; VICE PRESIDENT, WASHINGTON POST; OTHERS, Yet to be identified Liable Persons, Washington Post; ST. MARY S TODAY, a/k/a Island Publishing Company; KENNETH C. ROSSIGNOL, Owner/Publisher, St. Mary s Today; REPORTER(S), ST. MARY S TODAY; EDITOR(S), ST. MARY S TODAY; MANAGING EDITOR(S), ST. MARY S TODAY; CEO, ST. MARY S TODAY; CFO, ST. MARY S TODAY; PRESIDENT, ST. MARY S TODAY; VICE PRESIDENT, ST. MARY S TODAY; OTHERS, Yet to be named Liable Persons, St. Mary s Today; THEBAYNET; SEAN RICE, Owner/Publisher, TheBayNet; REPORTER(S), THEBAYNET; MANAGING EDITOR(S), THEBAYNET; CHIEF EDITOR, THEBAYNET; CEO, THEBAYNET; CFO, THEBAYNET; PRESIDENT, THEBAYNET; VICE PRESIDENT, THEBAYNET; OTHERS, Yet to be identified Liable Persons, TheBayNet; SHARON BELL; ANNA BEDFORD-DAVIS; JOSHUA DAVIS; CHRISTOPHER NORRIS, Defendants - Appellees. Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Peter J. Messitte, Senior District Judge. (8:08-cv-01130-PJM) Submitted: November 17, 2009 Decided: November 19, 2009 Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges. 2 No. 08-1766 dismissed; No. 09-1763 affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kess Tani, Appellant Pro Se. Kevin Hardy, WILLIAMS & CONNOLLY, LLP, Washington, D.C.; Thomas A. McManus, SASSCER, CLAGETT & BUCHER, Upper Marlboro, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 3 PER CURIAM: In No. 08-1766, Kess Tani noted an appeal from the district court s subject matter subsequently order dismissing granted Tani s complaint Because jurisdiction. his the motion for for lack district of court reconsideration and vacated that order, the appeal from that order is moot. We therefore dismiss this portion of the appeal. In No. 09-1763, Tani appeals from the district court s order 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. Tani v. The Washington Post, No. 8:08-cv-01130-PJM (D. Md. June 18, 2009). facts and materials legal before We dispense with oral argument because the contentions are adequately the and argument court presented would not in the aid the decisional process. No. 08-1766 DISMISSED No. 09-1763 AFFIRMED 4

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.