Tonnie Nealy v. Melinda Masters, et al.

Whether the district court erred and or violated the binding ruling in YOUNGBERG V. ROMEO, 457 U.S. 307, (1982), by not applying the professional judgment standard to review and determine plaintiff's substantive due process claim, that occurred while he was a civilly committed detainee, since the Youngberg ruling, requires the district court to apply the professional judgment standard to review civil detainees substantive due process claims occurring during his civil detainment.

Whether the district court violated the U.S. supreme court's ruling in ANDERSON V. LIBERTY LOBBY, INC. 477 U.S. 242 (1986) when it granted summary judgment for defendants and weighed disputed material facts, determined the credibility of witnesses sworn statements and decided upon genuine issues of material facts in dispute.

Whether it was a violation of the 14th Amendment due process of law, for the district court to weigh or determine credibility issues or genuine issues of material facts in dispute, between plaintiffs and defendants affidavits and evidence.

Whether plaintiff's exacerbated pain and suffering and or unnecessary pain, caused by defendants delay in providing him recommended outside specialist recommended medical treatment for his serious heart condition , Knee condition and ear condition, stated an adequate physical injury for his constitutional claims alleging defendant denied him outside specialist fh medical care for his serious medical needs, in violation of the 14 amendment due process of law.