Did the Alabama Supreme Court violate petitioner pro se' State and Federal Constitutional Rights of due-process, when they refuse to adjudicate a case that presented violation by the lower court(s) of not following the statutes and Rules as it pertained to case of an Independent Action under the (saving clause} pursuant to Rule 60(b)(6) along with the issue of ineffective assistance of counsel, by issuing a 'no opinion ruling?'

QUESTIONS PRESENTED I. Did the Alabama Supreme Court violate petitioner pro se’ State and Federal Constitutional Rights of due-process, when they refuse to adjudicate a case that presented violation by the lower court(s) of not following the statutes and Rules as it pertained to case of an Independent Action under the (saving clause} pursuant to Rule 60(b)(6) along with the issue of ineffective assistance of counsel, by issuing a “no opinion ruling?” I. Is the Alabama Supreme Court and Court of Civil Appeals’ authority to issue a “no opinion ruling” part of the same lock-step doctrine of the high federal courts ability to also issue a “no opinion ruling? Was this authority to issue these “no opinion rulings” on appellate review made possible through the Federal Judicial Act of 1925 and its updated amendments? And if so, did the Congress of this period pass an unconstitutional law that has now caused the State and Federal Appellate Courts to improperly exercise the Mandatory and Appellate Review System.