Whether Nevada courts abused discretion and made errors in fact and law

No question identified. : QUESTIONS FOR THE SUPREME COURT 1. Whether all Nevada Courts abused their discretion and made errors in fact and in ' misapplying the court rules by not ruling if the State Court Proceedings are DEFECTIVE and are improper before the court as Nationstar violated numerous court rules which prejudiced the Galvan in conducting his case?? This deprives Galvan of procedural due process as mandated Nevada’s Constitution and 5th and 14th Amendments of the US. Constitution regarding procedural due process of property. 2. Whether the Nevada Appeals Court made errors in fact in applying Nevada law and federal law [18 U.S.C. § 1028(a)(1)(2)] by deeming Galvan in lacking in standing where the Appeals Court deemed the mortgage assignment "voidable’ ?? Nevada law . NRS 107 [Deed of Trusts], federal court rulings and law, and the William’s Test state otherwise, to be “void”. The ruling violates and deprives Galvan the fundamental constitutional rights of substantive due process in Nevada’s Constitution and 5th and 14th Amendments of the US. Constitution regarding procedural due process of property. 3. Whether the Nevada State Courts has abused their discretion by setting aside end/or not considering facts and findings of the Consent Orders/Decrees issued by the Office of Thrift and Supervision regarding Aurora Loan Services and 1999 MERS Corporation pursuant to 12 USC § 1818(i)(1)?? The affidavits signed by these parties [Nationstar, Aurora] for this case lack trustworthiness. These were the bases of the Galvan’s preliminary injunction in which the lower court denied. Appeals Court and Nevada Supreme Court let the lower court ruling stand. 2 . A Whether the Nevada State Courts abused their discretion and misapplied Nevada Law [NRS 106.210] where Nationstar and previous parties did not record all of the “ ‘chain of assignments or Deed of Trust as mandated by the said statute?? NRS 106.210 states that foreclosing proceedings shall be terminated and voided if instruments are NOT recorded. In addition, Nationstar. the entity who are trying to foreclose, lack proof that they have in their possession original instruments together with the deed of Trust pursuant to the Nevada Supreme Court rulings and the Uniform Commercial Code. Appeals court order contradicts Nevada Supreme Court order. 5. Whether the Nevada State Courts has misapplied compulsory counterclaim rules NRCP 13(a) by dismissing CV15-01360 even though both cases of CV12-02785 and CV15-01360 were consolidated?? As numerous federal courts have determined that dismissal of cases due to compulsory counterclaims when cases are consolidated is inappropriate. A misapplication in dismissing cases due to NRCP 13(a) deprives and prejudices Galvan procedural due process 14 and 15t» Amendments of the U.S. Constitution in conducting his case. : , 6. Whether the Nevada Courts has violated their discretion and deprived Galvan of due process rights and free speech pursuant to the First Amendment, 5th and 14th of the US. Constitution by naming Galvan vexatious litigant even though Nationstar and its counsel broke numerous court's rules and Galvan presented substantial evidence in which the lower courts set aside or ignored to support his case and to vigorously defend the actions in these proceedings?? . @ 3