1) Where the district court awarded fees to
Petitioner under state insurance law for Respondent's
unreasonable litigation conduct, did the Seventh
Circuit err in reversing the award by holding the
Federal Rules of Procedure provide exclusive remedies
for conduct in federal court?

2) Where the Seventh Circuit dismissed
Respondent's first appeal as premature but denied
Petitioner's Rule 38 motion alleging that appeal was
frivolous, and where the panel made the following
accompanying statement:
If it were permissible for a court to order both
sides to pay a penalty—say, into the law clerks'
holiday-party fund—we would be inclined to do
so. But there's no such appellate power and no
good reason for us to order Jackson to pay
something to Cooke as a result of a problem that
both sides missed.
did the panel show a deep-seated antagonism toward
the widow-Petitioner and favoritism toward InsurerRespondent requiring disqualification for apparent bias
on Petitioner's later motion under 28 U.S.C. § 455(a)?

3) Where Respondent's initial appeal was dismissed
for lack of appellate jurisdiction, in part, because that
judgment was unsigned in violation of Rule 58(b)(2)(B),
did the Seventh Circuit err in holding Petitioner's later
cross-appeal to be untimely after the signed judgment
was entered?

Where the district court awarded fees to Petitioner under state insurance law for Respondent's unreasonable litigation conduct, did the Seventh Circuit err in reversing the award by holding the Federal Rules of Procedure provide exclusive remedies for conduct in federal court?