Whether I should have been granted a jury trial after petitioning the ND Supreme Court three times abiding by the law in the 7th amendment

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. The question I present is: Whether I should have been granted a jury trial after petitioning the ND Supreme Court three times abiding by the law in the 7th amendment. 2. The question I present is: Whether it was legal for the Supreme Court to break the 7 amendment. It appears the 5th and the 14th amendment were also violated. 3. The Question I Present is: Whether I the Petitioner, was denied my Constitutional and Other Rights because of Conflict of Interest that the North Dakota Courts did not Properly Address and Resolve. 2 3 4. The question I present is: Whether the Supreme Court of North Dakota discriminated against me if they supplemented the FADED PAGES to protect Judge Rustad, but would not supplement the record to protect my rights of property by the 14th amendment. Please consider as you read what follows that I am not an attorney and I am not presently represented by counsel. The content of what follows is entirely my own. Note: I capitalized the titles of documents. To explain it I have to tell the whole story of my faded brief. I am setting forth the laws broken by the North Dakota Supreme Court: I presented five evidences in District Court, and of the five, only one was presented by my former attorney Greg Hennessey. Which was titled: DIST CRT FADED PAGES BRIEF 4-7-14. When Greg printed it, his printer ran out of ink; so the bottom 3 4 half of my brief was faded and unreadable. Hereafter called FADED PAGES. See