U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 2024

Christopher White v. Devon Key

Christopher White v. Devon Key
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Decided April 15, 2024

Christopher White v. Devon Key

Opinion

USCA4 Appeal: 23-1683 Doc: 22 Filed: 04/15/2024 Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 23-1683

CHRISTOPHER GLENN WHITE, an individual, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. DEVON KEY, an individual; ALLISON MAHER, a/k/a Marie Smith, an individual; TUCOWS, INC., a Pennsylvania Company; CLOUDFLARE, INC., a California Company; ROBERT WIGGEN, d/b/a Arrests.org, a foreign company; CHELSEA WEBSTER, an individual; CRYSTAL STEVENSON, an individual; DONALD T.

SLOAN, Sheriff of Lynchburg, Virginia; RYAN ZUIDEMA, Chief of Police, Lynchburg, Virginia; KRISTEN BORAK, Freedom of Information Officer, Blue Ridge Regional Jail Authority; CITY OF LYNCHBURG VIRGINIA, Defendants - Appellees, COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA, Intervenor - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Lynchburg. Norman K. Moon, Senior District Judge. (6:23-cv-00007-NKM)

Submitted: April 11, 2024 Decided: April 15, 2024

Before AGEE and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

USCA4 Appeal: 23-1683 Doc: 22 Filed: 04/15/2024 Pg: 2 of 3

Christopher Glenn White, Appellant Pro Se. Frederick William Eberstadt, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia; Nathan Henry Schnetzler, FRITH, ANDERSON & PEAKE, PC, Roanoke, Virginia; Jim H. Guynn, Jr., GUYNN WADDELL, P.C., Salem, Virginia, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 23-1683 Doc: 22 Filed: 04/15/2024 Pg: 3 of 3

PER CURIAM: Christopher Glenn White appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. White v. Key, No. 6:23-cv-00007-NKM (W.D. Va. June 8, 2023). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.