ISSUE I: WHETHER THE TRIAL COURT EFFECTIVELY REMOVED THE
FACTUAL INQUIRY INTO PETITIONER "EXERCISE OF
REASONABLE DILIGENCE " UNDER NEW YORK CLS CPLR
214-c (2) FROM THE JURY IN FAVOR OF AN OBJECTIVE
STANDARD WHICH DISPENSES WITH ANY NEED TO
ASCERTAIN PETITIONER 'S KNOWLEDGE AS TO THE
ETIOLOGY OF AN INJURY?

ISSUE II: WHETHER THE TRIAL COURT 'S REMOVAL FROM THE JURY
THE MATERIAL FACT QUESTION OF WHEN PETITIONER
KNEW OR REASONABLY SHOULD HAVE KNOWN THE
LATENT INJURY OF METALOSIS SUSTAINED BY
PETITIONER, AND DECIDING SAID MATERIAL FACT
QUESTION DURING SUMMARY JUDGMENT PROCEEDING
VIOLATED PETITIONER 'S SEVENTH AMENDMENT RIGHT
UNDER THE U.S. CONSTITUTION?

ISSUE III: THE SECOND CIRCUIT FAILED TO FOLLOW FED. R. EVID.
702 AND WHERE THE PANEL 'S FAILURE TO ADHERE TO
THE STANDARD OF "DISPUTES OF MATERIAL FACT " IN
THE REVIEW AND GRANTING OF A SUMMARY JUDGMENT
MOTION UNDER CPLR 214C(2) DEPRIVED PETITIONER OF
A JURY 'S CONSIDERATION THEREBY CONFLICTING WITH
THE SUPREME COURT 'S RULINGS IN ANDERSON V.
LIBERTY LOBBY, INC. AND RELATED CASES

Whether the trial court improperly removed the factual inquiry into reasonable diligence and material fact questions from jury consideration in violation of the Seventh Amendment and Federal Rules of Evidence