Gregory Bartko v. Clay Wheeler
This text of 589 F. App'x 181 (Gregory Bartko v. Clay Wheeler) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Gregory Bartko appeals the district court’s orders transferring this action to the Eastern District of North Carolina, denying his recusal motion, and dismissing his complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. As to Bartko’s recusal motion, we conclude that the district court’s failure to “pass on the1 legal sufficiency of the facts alleged” in Bartko’s 28 U.S.C. § 144 (2012) declaration is not reversible error because the affidavit was insufficient as a matter of law. Sine v. Local No. 992 Int’l Bind, of Teamsters, 882 F.2d 913, 914 (4th Cir. 1989). We affirm the transfer order and the dismissal of the complaint for the reasons stated by the district court. Bartko v. Wheeler, No. 5:14-ct-03043-D, 2014 WL 3563359 (E.D.N.C. July 18, 2014); Bartko v. Wheeler, No. l:13-cv-01006-JAB-LPA (M.D.N.C. Feb. 10, 2014). We grant Bart-ko’s motion to exceed the length limitations for his informal brief. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and *182 legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
589 F. App'x 181, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gregory-bartko-v-clay-wheeler-ca4-2015.