Akers v. Weinshienk
This text of 327 F. App'x 811 (Akers v. Weinshienk) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
ORDER AND JUDGMENT *
This Bivens action was dismissed sua sponte by a district court judge named as a defendant. Under 28 U.S.C. § 455(b)(5), a judge must recuse when named as a party to a proceeding. Accordingly, we REVERSE and REMAND this case for reassignment to a judge not named as a party in the complaint. This order neither makes nor implies any view about the appropriate disposition after reassignment.
We GRANT Plaintiffs motion to proceed without prepayment of fees and remind him of his continuing obligation to make partial payments until the filing fee has been paid in full. We DENY all other pending motions.
This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its persuasive value consistent with Fed. R.App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1.
After examining the briefs and the appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2). Therefore, this case is ordered submitted without oral argument.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
327 F. App'x 811, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/akers-v-weinshienk-ca10-2009.