1) he Distic Cor Aiona n the ptner Evn uce ual when abusing their discretion ruling Judges are absolutely immone. from S 1983 suits for damages when the petitioner Evans motioned the cout to end compliant to Dedraty Judment Inn [sth and 14th amendment vrolations]

2) Did the District Court of Arizona deny the petitioner Evans justice when [Equal Protection] abusing theisretion hdrRol a Lof the Federal Rules of Ci Pcedue; this mandate is to be heeded? [5th and 14th Amend ment vidations]

3) Did the Maricopa County Superior court in CRaoll-123oay deny the petitione Evans justice when placing the petitioner in involuntary serivitode, by denying (see Appendiy D) bail cateogorically? [sth and 14th Amendment violations] 1983 [sth and 14tn Amenelment violations]

Did the District Coort of Arizonas decision to rule against the petition Evans, refusing to liberally" construe the petition, and or Did the District Coorts of Arizona's decision to rule against the petifioner without de termining if in "fctthe petitioner was held against his wil beyond the scope of notice, cause Evans to not beable to enjoy justice and liberty"conerning the right to enjoy prpertyhference oen requlation. Jth and 94th [5th Amendment violations]

id the Distrct Court of Arizona, and Nith ciruit Courtf appeals prove for a ppropriate governmental interest suitable further by the differential treatment of Evans [15th and 14th Amendment vrolations]

Was the Bi RefrmAct an decatry decree volatedby the Superior Coort of Maricopa County, an exception allowing 42 V.S.C.S1983 and 14th Amendment vislations Sth

Did the District Court of Arizona deny the petitioner Evans justice when abusing their discretion ruling Judges are absolutely immune from §1983 suits for damages