Corruption-within-state-court-system

QUESTIONS PRESENTED This case involves corruption within the state court system, injustice, conflict of interest, partiality, unfair treatment of Petitioner; the denial of Petitioner’s legal rights; and Petitioner being denied proper consideration for an individual with disabilities. Respondents Brown & Dortch, LLC conspired, covered up, minimized; and withheld critical, pertinent evidence in this case. The court below denied Petitioner proper consideration pursuant to Americans with Disabilities Act. The questions presented are: . 1. Why review of the corruption that exists within the state courts not considered desirable for review by certiorari by the Court of Appeals? 2. How is it that review of the corruption that exists within the state court , system not in the best interest of the public? 3. Why is review of the corruption that plagued the present case by the District and Circuit Courts for St. Mary’s County, not considered desirable for review by certiorari by the Court of Appeals? ; . 4. Why is review by certiorari of the corruption that exists within the state court system not considered important to the public of the issue? 5. How far within the state court system does the corruption stretch? 6. Why review of the injustice that Petitioner experienced within the state court system not considered desirable for review by certiorari by the Court of Appeals? 7. Why is it that the injustice that Petitioner experienced within the state court system not desirable for review by certiorari not in the best interest of the public? 8. How far within the state court system does the injustice stretch? 9. How is it that the conflict of interest of the circuit court judge presiding over this case and the judge’s relationship with the attorney of record in — this case not a consideration of importance to the public of the issue? 10.How is it that partiality and unfair treatment of Petitioner (who is indigent), as well as the indigent public, who are honest people, not willing to participate and/or unable to participate in the state court corruption due to the inability to pay the high price (sometimes as much as $20,000) to buy their case, not desirable for review by certiorari by the Court of Appeals? 11. Why is partiality and unfair treatment of Petitioner (who is indigent), as well as the indigent public, who are honest people, not willing to participate and/or unable to participate in the state court corruption due to the inability to pay the high price (sometimes as much as $20,000) to buy their case, not a consideration of importance to the public of the issue? 3 12.Is an attorney required to enter his/her appearance in a case in order to provide representation to a party or parties in a case? 13.Is an attorney required to enter his appearance in a case before he/she can become involved in the case? 14. If an attorney has not entered his/her appearance in a case, can he/she go on record in the case?