Shall a writ lie for violation of due process

ISSUES PRESENTED FOR REVIEW 1. Shall a writ lie for violation of due process because the California Supreme Court violated its own Constitution by allowing one department of the Superior Court to contemporaneously overrule another department in the same matter ? 2. Were the Petitioners denied due process and their right to redress by the Supreme Court of California when it affirmed the decision of the California Court of Appeals allowing the trial court to dismiss the Petitioners’ entire action without notice and a hearing? : 3. Were the Petitioners denied due process and equal protection when the California Court of Appeals affirmed a lower court’s judgement, ignoring their published opinion in Martin-Bragg vs. Moore 219 Cal App 4th 367 (2013), and the rulings of two other judges who found that Petitioner Moore had a beneficial interest in his Shenandoah home because he and only he paid the mortgage, taxes and improvements on his Shenandoah home for over twenty years? 4, Were Petitioners’ denied due process and right to possess and enjoy and property and practice their profession using their professional property, when the California Supreme Court affirmed the denial of their Constitutional right by upholding Judge Johnson’s denial of the return of their adjudged converted property, leaving it in the hands of the converter Martin-Bragg? i 5. Were the Petitioners denied due process and their right to fair and impartial court to redress grievances when the California Supreme Court affirmed their denial of their California Constitutional and inviolate rights to trial by jury and by failing to find such a denial reversible prejudicial error ? 6. Were the Petitioners denied due process and their First Amendment right to redress grievances by the Supreme Court of California when it affirmed the decision of the California Court of Appeals affirming the lower courts orders denying the Appellants any discovery on whether defendant actually paid anything for the Shenandoah home when the defendant herself testified and the Superior Court and the Court of Appeals previously found, that Petitioner Moore paid the mortgage, taxes and improvements? 7. Were the Petitioners denied redress before a fair and impartial Court, when Justice Helen Bendix , was abruptly removed from the Court of Appeals Panel during oral argument, after she acknowledged she had ruled that Petitioner Moore was the owner of the Shenandoah home while a Superior Court Judge, and in another action with the same defendant Martin-Bragg, and ordered Mr. Moore only to pay the $290,000 judgment lien or lose his 6150 Shenandoah family home? ii