Whether lower courts erred by acting on a petition filed and served without summons as required

QUESTIONS PRESENTED I. LOWER COURTS ERRED BY ACTING ON A PENTION FILED AND SERVED WITHOUT SUMMONS AS REQUIRED BY FEDERAL COMMON LAW AND FEDERAL PROCEDURAL DUE PROCESS ? Il. WHETHER A PERSON WHO IS NOT A QUALIFIED ELECTOR OF A COUNTY WHERE A PROBATE COURT MATTER Ig PROPERLY LOCATED CAN SERVE AS A PROBATE COURT JUDGE FOR THAT COUNTY IN ANY CAPACITY IN DEROGATION OF PETITIONERS’ RIGHT TO VOTE AND THE US CONSTITUTION’S RIGHT OF ONE MAN ONE VOTE ? I. DID THE TRIAL COURT COMMIT AN ABUSE OF DISCRESTION PREJUCING THE PETITIONERS’ RIGHT TO A FAIR TRIAL BY QUASING A CERTAIN SUBPOENA AND NOT UNREDACTING A CERTAIN LETTER IN , VIOLATION OF PETITIONERS’ DUE PROCESS ii QUESTIONS PRESENTED RIGHT TO PRESENT EVIDENCE AND PROPERLY CROSS-EXAMIN AN OPPOSING PARTY ? IV. RESPONDENT KNIGHT-TONNEY’S CLAIM IS AN EQUITABLE ACTION SUBJECT TO DE NOVO REVIEW AND OTHER EQUITABLE PRINCIPLES? Vv. THE LOWER COURTS FAILED TO UPHOLD | §.C.CODE ANN. 308) AND THE AUTOMATIC? | VI. CONSCIOUS, INTENTIONAL FAILURE TO | DISCLOSE FINANCIAL ARRANGEMENTS TO MILDRED KNIGHT REQUIRED BY COURT APPOINTMENT AND EQUITABLE PRINCIPLES IS | CONDUCT SUBSTANTIATING FRAUD IN THE . INDUCEMENT TO ENTER A CONTRACT ? | Vil. THE LOWER COURTS’ ALLOWANCE OF RESPONDENT KNIGHTTONNEYS CLAIM IS AGAINST THE GREATER WEIGHT OF THE EVIDENCE AND AN ABUSE OF DISCRETION? | QUESTIONS PRESENTED VIll. THE LOWER COURTS ERRED IN HOLDING THAT RESPONDENT TONNEYS CLAIM FOR REPAYMENT WAS TIMELY FILED? IX, THE LOWER COURTS ERRED IN HOLDING THAT RESPONDENT KNIGHT-TONNEY HAD SATISFIED THE LEGAL REQUIREMENTS FOR CASE-INCHIEF? x THE LOWER COURTS FERRED BY REIMBURSING RESPONDENT KNIGHT-TONNEY 3 FOR ATTORNEY FEES IN PARENTS’ FAMILY COURT MATTER AND ALLOWING FULL INTEREST ON JUDGMENT? XI. BEATRICE WHITTEN SHOULD BE REMOVED AS SPECIAL ADMINISTRATOR ?