Whether petitioner's due process and equal protection rights were violated under 42 USCA § 1983

QUESTIONS PRESENTED FOR REVIEW: } | 1. WHETHER PETITIONER'S DUE PROCESS RIGHTS AND EQUAL } PROTECTION RIGHTS VIOLATED UNDER 42 USCA § 1983 WHEN THE CHEROKEE COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT BOARD OF TRUSTESS FAILED TO i FILE A RECORD CERTIIFED BY THE CHIEF OFFICIAL OF THE SCHOOL BOARD OF TRUSTEES WITHIN 30 DAYS OF APPELLANT FILING AN APPEAL IN THE CIRCUIT COURT? FAILURE TO FILE A COMPLETE RECORD SIGNED | BY AN OFFICIAL OF THE AGENCY RESULTS IN THE TEACHER | TERMINATION BEING NULL AND VOID. A. WHETHER CONTINUING CONTRACT TEACHER BROWN'S DUE PROCESS AND EQUAL PROTECTION RIGTS VIOLATED UNDER 42 USCA § 1983 WHEN S.C. CODE OF LAWS, TITLE 1 CHAPTER 23 SECTION 1-23-320 (G) WAS IGNORED? S.C. CODE OF LAWS, TITLE 1 CHAPTER 23 SECTION 1-23320 (G) IS UPHELD AND HONORED FOR OTHER OCCUPATIONS IN THE l STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA. WAS BROWN DISCRIMINATED AGAINST BY RESPONDENT DISTRICT AND THE SOUTH CAROLINA COURTS BECAUSE | OF OCCUPATION AND RACE? B. WAS THE INDIANA SUPREME COURT CORRECT WHEN IT HELD IN | AN ORDER FILED ON NOVEMEBER 13, 2014, THAT A PETITONER SEEKING | JUDICIAL REVIEW OF AN AGENCY ACTION MUST FILE WITH THE TRIAL COURT THE AGENCY RECORD AS DEFIND BY THE ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS AND PROCEDURES ACT? . C. WAS PETITONER, BROWN, DUE PROCESS AND EQUAL PROTECTIONS RIGHTS VIOLATED UNDER 42 USCA § 1983 BY THE STATE | COURTS OF SOUTH CAROLINA WHEN SOUTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS ALLOWED RESPONDENT DISTRICT TO FILE A TEACHER DISMISSAL TRANSCRIPT YEARS LATER AT THE COURT OF APPEALS? THE COURT OF APPEALS AND THE SUPREME COURT OF SOUTH CAROLINA WERE AWARE THAT THE CLERKS OFFICE FOR CHEROKEE COUNTY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CONFIRMED THAT RESPONDENT DISTRICT NEVER FILED AN ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD AT THE LOWER COURT (COURT OF COMMON PLEAS). D. WHETHER THE SUPREME COURT OF SOUTH CAROLINA, THE ; SOUTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS, AND THE CIRCUIT COURT | (COURT OF COMMON PLEAS) COULD LEGALLY ENGAGE IN i} | "SUBSTANTIAL INQUIRY" INTO WHETHER THE RESPONDENT DISTRICT ! HAD SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE TO TERMINATE BROWN AS A TEACHER, GIVEN THAT THE RESPONDENT DISTRICT DID NOT SUBMIT TO THE CIRCUIT COURT CLERK OF COURT'S OFFICE A COMPLETE CERTIFIED RECORD FROM THE SCHOOL DISTRICT SIGNED BY AN OFFICIAL AS MANDATED BY RULE 75 SCRCP, S.C. CODE §59-25-480 OF SOUTH CAROLINA TEACHER EMPLOYMENT AND DISMISSAL LAW, AND S.C. CODE OF LAWS TITLE 1 CHAPTER 23 SECTION 1-23-320(G)? E.. WHETHER THE SUPREME COURT OF SOUTH CAROLINA AND SOUTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS SHOULD HAVE RULED THAT THE FILING OF A CERTIFIED RECORD SIGNED BY AN OFFICIAL OF THE AGENCY (SCHOOL DISTRICT) IS A PREREQUSITE TO THE PURSUIT OF A TEACHERS REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW OF HER TERMINATION BY | THE CIRCUIT COURT? aT F. WHETHER ALL LEVELS OF STATE COURT IN SOUTH CAROLINA LACK THE AUTHORITY TO AUTHORIZE AN EXTENSION TO FILE AN AGENCY RECORD CERTIFIED BY AN AGENCY OFFICIAL WHEN THE AGENCY (RESPONDENT DISTRICT) DID NOT REQUEST AN EXTENSION BEFORE THE 30 DAY PERIOD TO FILE RECORD EXPIRED? G. DID THE SUPREME COURT OF SOUTH CAROLINA AND THE SOUTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS ERR IN NOT RULING THAT AN ; AGENCY'S (SHOOL DISTRICT'S) FAILURE TO FILE A COMPLETE AND OFFICIAL CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT OF RECORD IN A TEACHER TERMINATION APPEAL IS TANTAMOUNT TO NO TRANSCRIPT AT ALL HAVING BEEN FILED BY THE SCHOOL DISTRICT? 3