Stephen Lambert v. Ross Casteel, York City Police Officer

The District Court time-barred the events and facts on which Lambert brought forth his claim. The same order ruled that continuing wrongs “do” exist. (APPENDIX C) Did Circuit judges, Restrepo, Freeman and Nygaard error in their decision not to admit Lambert's argument citing “Continuing Wrongs” in his petition for rehearing?

Is Officer Ross Casteel in violation of 18 USC & 4 (misprision of felony) by his deliberate decision to conceal Lambert’s complaint? In violation of UCR regulations.

Is Officer Ross Casteel in violation of 42 U.S.C. & 1983 (Constitutional Due Process Rights) by his “Misuse of State Authority”?

Should Lambert had received default judgement in his favor when the defendant was 35 days late responding to Lambert’s Amended Complaint after motioning the court for relief?

The Supreme Court mandates in Willowbrook that plaintiffs need not allege that they are part of a suspect class to state Equal Protection claim. Can Lambert bring forth his claim citing Supreme Court precedent- Equal Protection?