Okay, just so I understand. Your trial judge failed to do something or another, and there is no final in the file. This judge and perhaps other judges have ruled in ways that you find contrary to the law, or without appropriate process. But you do not have evidence that any of these actions were done for money or favor or advantage, right? And the "corruption" you describe involves not conducting the proceedings in the way you contend they should have been conducted?
If that was all I had, I would not have a case. I have much much more. When the CJ of the state supreme court admits, during in in-person meeting with me in his chambers, that I was entitled to a hearing in the state supreme court on my petition for a writ of mandamus, admits that he authored an appellate court opinion that clearly established that I was entitled to a default judgment in the amount of $1.2 million dollars, that there was no legal authority for appellate court commissioner who illegally exercise judicial authority in case the supreme court wants to send to a black hole because if they actually heard the case as required by the constitution, it would expose the vastness of the judicial corruption in the state, I think it is far, far more than just 'error'.
Why the CJ of the state supreme court agreed to meet with me would take more time to explain that I have right now, but I think you would agree that it would be highly unusual for the top judicial officer in a state to meet with private citizen concerning a legal matter that the state supreme court should have conducted a hearing on but has refused to do so.