Whether Carlson's constitutional right to due process and constitutional right to receive full faith and credit of a final judgment was violated when certain Illinois courts ignored, refused to acknowledge, consider, address or comment in any manner on the evidence presented, which included a prior final judgment ruling on a dispositive issue, and the law presented that established that Carlson's has a viable claim for legal malpractice claim against Cronin for his failure to timely file a legal malpractice claim against Drinker before the statute of limitations and statute of repose expired.

Whether the underlying proceedings were a "sham" because the conclusion was predetermined and not based upon the undisputed evidence and law presented by both parties at the hearings in this case.

Whether a trial court in Illinois violated the Full Faith and Credit Act and 28 U.S.C. 1738 by refusing to comply with a final judgment rendered previously by the same judge in the same matter but involving another party.

Whether Carlson's constitutional right to due process and constitutional right to receive full faith and credit of a final judgment was violated