1. Whether Armand Roos ' participation as Plaintiff 's
attorney and primary witness was procedurally
and evidentiary concern a violation of Due Pro
cess. Further, Roos ' familiarity with the trial judge
and Petitioner 's two attorney witness by a hand
shake and shoulder clasp in front of the jury, along
with the admittedly false testimony of plaintiff 's
accountant and accounting and the denial of right
to present evidence was unfair and deprivation of
Due Process pursuant to the Fourteenth Amend
ment.

2. Judge Jeff Cox was the writing judge in the Loui
siana Second Circuit Court of Appeals. At the time
of the trial in District Court, Jeff Cox was running
against a 20-year incumbent for the appellate
court. Following the district court trial and verdict,
Cox received campaign contributions from the
Wiener, Wiess & Madison law firm, Roos and all
the attorneys that worked on this case. Cox won
the election and immediately became the writing
Judge. The question presented is whether Judge
Cox 's failure to disclose these contributions is vio
lative of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth
Amendment.

Whether Armand Roos' participation as Plaintiff's attorney and primary witness was procedurally and evidentiary concern a violation of Due Process