Did the Wisconsin courts deprive petitioners of due process by reversing sanctions without notice?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1) Did the Wisconsin Court of Appeals Deprive and Did the Wisconsin Supreme Court’s Refusal to Accept the Case for Review Permit the Deprivation of Petitioners of their Property in the Form of Monetary Sanctions Without Affording Procedural Due Process of Law by the Court of Appeals’ Reversing, Without Notice or Prior Opportunity for Petitioners to Be Heard, the Circuit Court’s Denial of Sanctions on Grounds Not Raised in Woodboro’s Circuit Court Motion for Sanctions and Based upon the Court of Appeals’ Reliance on its Own Unbriefed, 4-prong Sua Sponte Analysis Where Each Prong of such Analysis Was Plainly Erroneous? 2) Did the Court of Appeals Err in Holding sua sponte that Wisconsin law, rather than federal law, governs the claim preclusive effect of the dispositive ruling(s) of a federal court made with respect to the same transactional claim and Did the Wisconsin Supreme Court Participate in that Error by Letting Stand that Error of Federal Law? 3) In Light of a Change in Federal Case Law Favorable to the Which Had the Effect of Abrogating an Karlier Unfavorable Ruling on the Merits Made During the Federal Court Phase of Judicial Proceedings on Plaintiffs’ Case, Did the Wisconsin Courts of Review Deny ’ the Equal Protection of the Laws by Allowing a Continuing Restraint Through Affording the Abrogated Federal Court Ruling Prospective Preclusive Effect on Religious Exercise to Stand While the Same Restraint Does Not Apply to All Other Future Similarly-Situated Religious Land Use Applicants Within Woodboro? 4) By Dispensing with Oral Argument contrary to Wis. STAT. §809.22(2), by an Unreasoned Summary Denial of a Motion for Reconsideration, and by Refusing to Address Numerous Issues and Arguments Raised on an Appeal as of Right, Did the Wisconsin Court of Appeals Deny Petitioners their Liberty Interest in and to Fair Adjudicative Process and/or in and to Free Exercise of their Religion Without Affording them Procedural Due Process of Law and Did the Wisconsin Supreme Court Participate in that Denial by Letting Stand the Decision of the Wisconsin Court of Appeals? -iiLIST OF ALL PARTIES (1) Petitioner Eagle Cove Camp & Conference Center, Inc., a Wisconsin nonstock corporation, was a plaintiff in the trial court and an appellant in the Wisconsin Court of Appeals and Wisconsin Supreme Court. Its