Can defendants the St. Regis Apartments claim res-judicata

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED . \, Can f Yorn Employer, Wee S\.Res) 5 APethenen| Xnc Cloion Sway are nok KE mQoyet onder Tie VN) ly Cowy\ Rak\ 5 Key o\ AGN YROS C, becav 5é \ney dow meet Ane qunbel on empbyees enn \noogh they Awe and Kad sole WV g, and Si Vy autor dy 7 Lh Canto conpen ies va a yaad emprey ef peladiey lbe Sued urdh ene rans eo sve \ervrel of does | nel e need \o betwe rg t. Sve \etdet s? a, be Ane Federal Roles of CAV \\ Proce dole Role a\\ow G Right No Sve Xo be Séing RS Oday S o & mailing | ry \ne\ 408 O4y Was ¢ Sondsy dees Aye Eke + ot he Go days be \he {o\\owhng YV\ on ay Y rt & So0dge GNES me Seven Ocys yo Wile Gn admen Jedorpvein\ ond KAe ok Auch was by , mal, S a aah q\\ow ed addi Yvon \ 3 dey from —— Bwadge efdel 5 . ; | C 30d6e ac\ WNqners\y ovel loo Keo \ve Nomely Me Right \e sue Lerre<f Qo Sen\oy Menesemed) in G $e Hit -CVClbas. , | QUESTIONS(S) PRESENTED : 6. CAN DEFENDANTS THE St. REGIS APARTMENTS CLAIM RES JUDICATA WHEN TRAIL COURT JUDGE ERRORED IN NOT STATING IF CASE 4:17-CV-01629 WAS DISMIISED WITH PREJUDICE OR DISMISSED WITH OUT PREJUDICE ON DISMISAL ORDERS NOVEMBER 17, 2017? 7. DID THE STATE COURT ERR IN DELAYING MOTION TO PRECEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS 112 DAYS? WAS RIGHT TO SPEEDY TRAIL VIOLATED? 8. WAS MOVE FROM STATE COURT TO FEDERAL COURT LAWFULL? 9. COULD THERE BE A CONFLICT OF INTEREST WITH THE JUDGE OVER SEEING BOTH CASES? 10. COULD THERE BE A CONFLICT OF INTEREST IF THE JUDGE HAS TIES TO ANY OF THE UPPER ECHOLANT ST. REGIS APARTMENT 48 SHAREHOLDERS, THEIR FAMILY, AND OR BUSINESSES TIES THAT INCLUDE ST. : REGIS SHAREHOLDERS THAT ARE DOCTORS LAWYERS AND MAYORS. 11. CAN THE FACTS OF THE CASE BE DENIED BEFORE DISCOVER IS SOUGHT? . . PAGE 2