Whether the U.S. Court of Appeals violated the petitioner's constitutional right to due-process by declining to consider the petitioner's claim that the affidavit-of-merit requirement is unconstitutional

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED D) Ta New Nersey, +o proceed wrt a state-based nealraqence lewsurk OME MAGS PrONIDE aA ALM david of Mec. LA costs cougnly 82,000 Yo POY on expec’ Xo provide She offi davis, Ws & unconshiuk onal MA Violakion of Are Dove Process Closse +o exclude indiaent prin soners From pecsurng, neqigencebased lawsurts solely becavse we cannot offerd to poy for on ASS dank of Meck © USCA BAY ar) Ln Wesve VE of ny Banvacry 1208 dored Laformers Baek bo Mae Couck of Appeals, apeakice\\y ve coke As AN lon Doverished Personen re courk system 2sSenti ally says 2. have no ght do o mol eras ce. Claim of ackhon Conless TL can offLord bo poy an expec’ fo PrONMdE an Ak donk of Merit) and TL wbelbeve tHnrek's oacomsterutional, USCA BG BIH. Dia the US Court of Ageeals W\oloxe my consi kubional Agynt ko Doe Process when ct declined Yo consider Tse VW lay lar eniney Hrat 1 never challencged Ane Corer yk onolity of ne Abtidaved of Meds reauicemest °¢ Sch BLA MY) TL acevsed Nurse Green ES Nnolotiney my BA Amenduveant cA As uoinen Ane cefvsed So ove mae crutches and forced me Lo wok On ry Kda\les CEBLLCS, WAH ae allecgd caused me to CX PENENCE \hensihied ean Sockher vayery Wn Ake Boren of an odditionc\ “ coe" ot ny Adklles Sendon , deserre her quareness a ony Kalk les tnyory. USCA Sb \H Yrowenex, Nurse. Green did erowrde pac kil Keeokmren’ in AKe Foren of Sched Vine, ~ doctor ok, Seon dX Ney Morin and aan ane ACENE and cesanict~ Vane me Grom wock and cecreadiona\ ackuvunes. IL prison) Kaas adae dle. Yamaankses Soe dockor w\sitks Ore (ne mores enkikled ¥o dcvals VE Mee accusations a\ene , Vrok Mae prison eo craks provided ccvel and Unusual raed co\ Loeokeneat ola, OW COLsesS \aenotes So ex PEC ence addi\Monad inyocy and rac ¢ USCA S\6,6 M4