Kenneth R. Talley, et al. v. United States District Court for the District of Delaware

Ken’s case presents a clear, novel question: Does the Due Process Clause require courts to provide ADA Title II accommodations and legal counsel to indigent and/or illiterate civil litigants facing loss of property? Is the granting of in forma pauperis status by state and federal courts located in Pennsylvania, in conjunction with the denial of in forma pauperis status by state and federal courts located in Delaware, in concurrent related cases, a controlling question of law? Does the Third Circuit's refusal to compel recusal of the district judge, despite proof of judicial bias demonstrated by public, URL-verified entries constituting valid circumstantial evidence of ex parte communications, violate the Due Process Clause, 28 U.S.C. § 455, and the Delaware Judges' Code of Judicial Conduct Rule 2.9? Under the Due Process Clauses of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, are state and federal judicial officers permitted to preside over and affirm the judgment of a civil case involving an elderly, indigent, and illiterate litigant after receiving forensic medical evidence of his incompetence — a first-to-second-grade reading level — without appointing a guardian or counsel, where judicial immunity operates to conceal criminal conspiracy, and ex parte communications, proven by public, URL-verified entries as valid circumstantial evidence, mandate recusal under 28 U.S.C. § 455 and the Delaware Judges' Code of Judicial Conduct Rule 2.9?