May a party who appears before a state judge who at the same time is donating to the
political campaign of the defendant chairman be entitled to a new trial for wilful violations of his
5th, 13th & 14th amendment rights. For in all instances the state judges ' "conflicts " is reflected
in their rulings/orders

May a party who is denied Fair and Impartial adjudication of his (federal civil rights)
claims, by state judge, deprived of his basic due process and equal protection rights, upon filing a
Motion to Reopen case per NH statute be entitled to new-assigned judge to be also free, of all
conflicts of interest: pecuniary-personal motives, the very basic for said motion to reopen. This
new J Delker also had conflict of interest with defendant 's Chairman^ Lamontagne, who, per then
NH AG Mclaughlin, provided them information (in die catholic abuse cases).

May a party be entitled to seek redress from the [NH] state 's highest court for Due
Process and Equal Protection and upon that denial and deprivation for relief then seek and
petition for a Writ of Certiorari from the United States Supreme Court for full vindication of his
Constitutional Rights; guarantees, provision & protection afforded to all citizens without regards.

May the state of NH be required to protect substantive due process and equal protections
rights and adhere to provisions of 28 U.S.C S 455(a). la Allied Signal, 891 ¥2 970, US Supreme
Court held "if the factual basis established by die moving party provides what and objective,
knowledgeable member of the public would find to be a reasonable basis for doubting a judge 's
impartiality, then recusal under 28 U.S.C S 455(a) is required. " Is not NH required to adhere to
statute(s) and case law to satisfy an Equal Protection clause and Due Process of law, guaranteed,
provided and protected to all.

May NH adhere to Circuits and US Supreme Court stare decisis in US v. Snyder , 235 F.3d
46 (1st Cir. 20001 the court stated that the "duty to sit does not exert equal weight with avoiding
appearance of impropriety. " For undisclosed conflict of interest constitutes theft of honest
services. Does Not Fraud [on court] violates due process of law, and terminates the "intangible
right to honest services " promised to the People. 18 U.S.C. § 1346. "A conspiracy to Obstruct an
individual's legitimate efforts to seek judicial redress for such a claim interferes with the
individual's Due Process Right of access to die courts ". Bell, 746 Fid 1261

May the US Constitution also protects "the right of individuals to pursue legal redress for
claims which have a reasonable basis in Law and Fact is protected by the First and Fourteenth
Amendments ". Bill Johnson 's Restaurants, Inc. v. NLRB , 461 U.S. 731,741,103 S.Ct. 2161,
2169, 76 L.Ed.2d 277 (1983) Bell v. City of Milwaukee, 746 F.2d 1205,1261 (7th Cir.1984).

May a plaintiff be able to vindicate bis federal substantive rights as defendant, its
executives, agents and (state actors

Whether a party is entitled to a new trial for violations of their 5th, 13th, and 14th Amendment rights when the state judge presiding over the case is donating to the political campaign of the defendant chairman