Whether a self-represented litigant's due process rights were violated in a civil case involving emotional distress claims, bankruptcy court proceedings, and potential judicial conflict of interest

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED | 1.) Should Due Process of Law as mandated by the United States Constitution Fourteenth Amendment be afforded to self-represented . litigant Plaintiff related to Civil Case against Defendant on the Matters of Infliction of Emotional Distress and Plaintiff's claims against Defendants to the United States Bankruptcy Court and Leave to Amend Complaint? 2.) Should self-represented litigant Plaintiffs Right to Appeal / review Civil Cases and Tolling Doctrines and Exceptions to res | ' judicatas be afforded? 3.) Should Conflict of Interest discovered by Petitioner in regards to Presiding Justice _ Kathleen O’Leary, CA Court of Appeals 4th 1 | District, Division Three (CCP 170.1-170.9) 2 and her spouse Kenneth Babcock, Director of Public Law Center being recipient of multithousand dollar’s gifts / donations from MUFG Holding Corporation, et al. (and for which Presiding Justice O'Leary denied her own recusal) be sufficient to vacate dismissal judgements of this case? Zz