Was this a reasonable question in the mind of the State Franklin County Court of Appeal on June 20, 1996 in the Memorandum Decision

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1.Was this a reasonable question in the mind of the State Franklin County Court of Appeal on June 20, 1996 in the Memorandum Decision in their agreement with the trial court, stating, “since [Appellant], McBroom, had no legal entitlement to appointment as a presiding judge, or even a judge, under R.C. 3501.22, she had failed to set forth an actionable claim against the Board of Elections, and the complaint must be dismissed. ‘Yet, in the same Memorandum Decision, on my hiring date being hired as , an employee on 1981, the trial court stated, “we agree with the conclusion of the trial court that the broad latitude provided to the FCBE, in making appointments of precinct judges precludes any claim by [Appellant] that she was in any way entitled to re-appointment to another annual term as presiding judge; moreover, at the time in question, R.C. 3501.22 made no mention at all of any distinct appointment procedure for the position of presiding judge, although the 1995 amendment to this statute does provide for this position.’ “Could it be true that in 1981 there was no such criteria as a distinct appointment according to R.C. 3501.22? Does this set [Appellant] apart from an employee as opposed to an independent contractor? 2. Has Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 been abolished from the law? If not, was it indicated in the Petitioner’s case in the United States District Court and ° the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit in their judgment in the case of McBroom? 3. Has the United States Court of Appeals decided an important question of Federal law wrongfully that should have been settled rightfully by that Court in favor of . McBroom? » a BS 4. Has the Court of Appeals decided an important federal question of law in a way that conflicts with relevant , decision(s) of the U.S. Supreme Court?