A federal appeals court has denied Steve Bartos' appeal to overturn a jury's ruling rejecting his claim that he was fired from a state job as part of a cover-up.
Three judges from the Third Circuit Court of Appeals rejected claims by Bartos' counsel that a Middle District Court judge blundered three evidentiary rulings during his April 2012 jury trial against state Department of Environmental Protection.
They also found in their May 31 ruling that no "manifest injustice" resulted when Judge Yvette Kane did not issue limiting instructions when charging the jury to return a verdict.
Bartos, of Mount Carmel, was fired from DEP in 2007 after 10 years with the department. He is now employed as Shamokin's city clerk.
The state says he was dismissed after harassing coworkers and behaving retaliatory, and for using a racial slur. Bartos claimed it came after he uncovered an alleged misappropriation of $525,000 in recycling grant funding awarded to Keep Pennsylvania Beautiful.
He denies DEP's allegations and filed a civil rights case in February 2008, naming former department secretary Kathleen A. McGinty among the defendants. She later was granted dismissal from the litigation.
Jurors deliberated two hours before rejecting Bartos' whistle-blower claim. He appealed the ruling in July 2012.
Bartos' appeal says Kane should not have granted a defense motion preventing the admission of perjury committed by two former coworkers during deposition in the case. That ruling prevented their cross-examination.
The appeal also held that out-of-court statements by former coworkers should not have been admitted.
The appeals judges upheld Kane's decision to preclude the perjury admission, saying the value of the evidence did not outweigh potential danger of unfair prejudice to the defendants.
As to the out-of-court statements described in Bartos' appeal as "hearsay," the judges found that Kane was correct in her interpretation that the statements were offered to establish information on why DEP disciplined and later terminated Bartos' employment.
Bartos does have the option to appeal the case to the U.S. Supreme Court.