Michael A. Young v. Thomas Duncan, et al.
JusticiabilityDoctri
Question not identified
QUESTION(S) PRESENTED LAR ex uitlully invoking SELF-execating Sections Sand 4 oh nel "am endmerit becoming o NAMED Setendark W3NT-cv-IOCAUT) NUS. Dish A CHIEF Connedicst “ERROR in’ PREMATURE’ Case’ DISMIESSALS Upon TUDGEMENTorerdbfor ALC Adendarits, in DISCARD of 38 V.5.C3455(0) MANDATED Self-enforcing’ RECUSAL” 22? a. Whether US.Dishria CHLEF SK Coonedtiaat intentional STAGED Fimdy CRYPTIC Yulinas ORDERED ore appropriately constrved vith ASTo DOTUSTICE Yeqvemeat 26 3,Should paihionecs equerhed preliminary RELTEF be GRANTED while case pending, entitled FINALTTN" 222 4, Whether EQUITABLE TOLLING doctrine ot the “STATUTE SY LIMITATIONS. is appliabele to cose 318-cv-B5 TAT) 22? STN oT should THIS continuing VIOLATION theory OF REALETY doctrine ; ‘on’ ollner APPLICABLE \urisdichional SAVIN C'qualSications be'APPLEED 7??? b Whether: US, Distid CHIEF GT Connedticut MISUSE, ABUSE"in this CREPTIC ot “LMPARTTAL pdidial REASONABLE TNQUTRY™ Provisional’ STANDING ORDER, Under "BOTH these cwil RICO" couge ot ACTIONS porsuant 18 U.5,CS\Tl-b8 ENABLES “the courts wrisdkonal REAUTREMENT?? Tihether “SECOND CIRCULT Court ERRORED on any RULINGS in DISHONOR” ot “TEMELY" binding, contractual COLORING OF LAW" agreements <i 9, Whether prior SECOND CLRCUET panel members \dicial “IMPROPRIETY Constitute, a“ VIOLATION’ ot av VS.CS455 (0),CB),and°OR' RENDER ANY 5 ALC” Subsequent VS. Distick “CHIEF and ciRcULT Courts decisions"VOED! 2??? 4. Whether “ALU! extoordiner y“EXTST ING cercumsbances RENDE Rcase | Consolidation and petitioner appointment crappropriake counsel with ~RELEASE Pending, entitles FINACETY 222 ID. Whether" EMERGENCY 38 US.CSAlDb supervisory CoRRECTIVE ACTION" how He; S i RN vlt Shovldlbe additionally ENFORCED in BOTH these CASES! unde OUR SUPREME Court exersize.“ power” 22?