Whether a decision with no opinion or legal authority depriving a person of property violates the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments

QUESTIONS PRESENTED ; The Fourteenth Amendment's due process clause declares that No state shall ... deprive any person of ... life, liberty or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” (emp) Pursuant to §10-2B-15.02(a), Ala.Code 1975, sometimes referred to as "the door-closing statute," foreign corporations “may not maintain a proceeding in this state without a certificate of authority. All contracts or agreements ... shall be held void at the action of the foreign corporation or by any person claiming through or under the foreign corporation by . virtue of the contract or agreement;." (emp) —--——--— “Petitioner's reference to “foreign corporations” below are those that failed to comply with state laws to “do business” and are not “within its jurisdiction” or “within” the jurisdiction of its courts. The Questions Presented Are: 1. Where “life, liberty & property” are fundamental rights equally protected, does a : ‘decision’ with no opinion or legal authority depriving a person of property violate the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment. ; 2. Where foreign corporations claims are barred : by 'door-closing’ statutes, does maintaining a “cause of action” or “affirmative defense” violate the di Fourteenth Amendment. 3. Where Respondent's claims are barred by the ‘door-closing' statute, did the court's failure to enforce the statute and barring Petitioner's claims in favor of Respondent violate the Fourteenth Amendment. 4, Where a decision has no facts, evidence or conclusions of law, is that decision sufficient to establish res judicata when there is no evidence claims were adjudicated “on the merit.” , 5. Where Respondent's foreclosure deed was unexecuted and unrecorded, did the court acquire jurisdiction over Respondent's ejectment claims or ee Petitioner's complaint to intervene to establish a court of “competent jurisdiction.” s 6. Where Petitioner was not a party to the ejectment action, does a dismissal as intervenor . “trigger” res judicata to bar claims as successor pursuant to Rule 25(c) and Rule 17(a). 7. Where Petitioner's claims were adjudicated “on the merits” pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1), did the courts affirmance of those void orders violate the ’ Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. 8. Where a Rule 60(b)(4) motion to vacate void orders is filed as an independent action, can that action be barred by res judicata and dismissed with ‘prejudice without establishing the validity of the orders to be vacated. 9. Where Respondent did not have a writ of possession or court order, did Respondent's entry and ; taking of the property. constitute criminal trespass and theft of property. 10. Where Respondent failed to establish standing iii : as the assignee of the mortgage in 2009, does Respondent have a right to proceed as successor in interest to bar Petitioner's recovery of the property. 11. Where Respondent did not prove authority to conduct a foreclosure sale, is the foreclosure deed “valid” because it was not “declared” void. 12. Where Respondent's claims were dismissed, can Respondent claim ownership of the property through the foreclosure sale by the order “dismissing” its claims. 13. Where Respondent's claims were dismissed oo. — pursuant to Rule 41(a)(2), did that dismissal render the foreclosure sale invalid, and the foreclosure deed void ab intitio. 14. Where Petitioner's transfer of interest complied with Rule 25(c) and Rule 17(a), did the : denial of the a right to proceed as successor in title constitute a denial of due process of the law. 15. Where Petitioner was the legal title holder of : record pursuant to Rule 25(c), was she the legal” owner with legal possession of the property by the dismissal of Respondent's ejectment claims. 16. Where Respondents claims were dismissed, does Rule 25(c) preclude relitigating those “dismissed claims” in a “separate action” as “affirmative defenses” to bar Petitioner's claims as successor in : title. 17. Wh