Whether a contested federal question in a state law legal malpractice case meets the substantiality threshold for federal question jurisdiction under Gunn and Grable precedents

1. Is a contested federal question in a state law legal malpractice case “substan tial,” such that it would give rise to federal questi on jurisdiction under this Court’s holdings in Gunn v. Minton , 568 U.S. 251, 260 64 (2013) and Grable & Sons Metal Prods. v. Darue Eng’g & Mfg ., 545 U.S. 308, 314 -16 (2005), when the answer to the question may affect the recognition and preclusive effect of an existing federal court judgment and, consequently, the rights and title of non -party purchasers of property pursuant to a federally super vised judicial foreclosure sale? 2. Will precluding the federal district court from exercising jurisdiction in this case amount to an invitation for a state court to decide the federal ques tion in a manner that would substantially disrupt the federal -state balance of judicial responsibilities?