Donald Jensen v. Western Carolina University

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 2:11-cv-00033-MR-DLH Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999182222].. [13-1110]

Appeal: 13-1110

Doc: 31

Filed: 08/28/2013

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-1110

DONALD JENSEN,
Plaintiff − Appellant,
v.
WESTERN CAROLINA UNIVERSITY; UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA;
ROBERT MCMAHAN, in his individual and official capacities;
MARY ANN LOCHNER, in her individual and official capacities;
JAMES ZHANG, in his individual and official capacities;
EARNEST HUDSON, JR., in his individual and official
capacities,
Defendants − Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Bryson City.
Martin K.
Reidinger, District Judge. (2:11−cv−00033−MR−DLH)

Submitted:

August 21, 2013

Before TRAXLER,
Judges.

Chief

Judge,

Decided:

and

MOTZ

and

August 28, 2013

THACKER,

Circuit

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

S. Luke Largess, TIN, FUTON, WALKER & OWEN, PLLC, Charlotte,
North Carolina, for Appellant.
Roy Cooper, Attorney General,
Katherine A. Murphy, Assistant Attorney General, NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees.

Appeal: 13-1110

Doc: 31

Filed: 08/28/2013

Pg: 2 of 3

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

2

Appeal: 13-1110

Doc: 31

Filed: 08/28/2013

Pg: 3 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Donald

Jensen

appeals

a

district

court

order

granting

summary judgment against him in his suit primarily alleging that
he was unlawfully retaliated against for speech protected by the
First Amendment and the North Carolina Whistleblower Act, see
N.C.G.S. § 126-84, et seq., and that he was temporarily barred
from campus in violation of his rights to due process under the
United States Constitution.

We have reviewed the record and we

find no error.

Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the

district court.

See Jensen v. Western Carolina Univ., 2012 WL

6728360

(W.D.N.C.

Dec.

28,

2012).

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

3