Whether the Petitioners' 5th and 14th Amendment rights were violated when the reviewing courts denied review on the merits of the case as the Petitioner argued a question of law, De Novo

Questions Presented for Review | Introductory Statement Question 1: The question on appeal was one of law not procedural error. The State court failed to adjudicate the claim on the merits, as there is no review of 755ILCS 45/2-10 in the Appellant Court’s Summary Order; thereby violating the Petitioners 5° and 14" rights to Due process and Equal protections under the law. | 1. Whether the Petitioners 5* and 14" Amend. Rights were violated when the 7 reviewing courts denied review on the merits of the case as the Petitioner argued . a question of law, De Novo “The court's interpretation of the statute is “clearly erroneous,: determination that the court only needs to find (A) the principle lacked capacity to control or revoke agency without subsection (B) a agent's action or inaction threatens “substantial harm” to the principal pursuant | ; 755ILCS 45/2-10 to revoke POA(Power of Attorney). Introductory Statement Question2: The appellee's petition in the lower court claimed in 2018 Hardison lacked competency, without certification; there was no evidence or _ “cause of action.” Violating Petitioners due process and equal protection rights 2. Whether the trial court then violated Petitioner's right to due process when the : Nlinois Supreme court already “precludes claims of incapacity as retroactive ” thereby, the appellee’s petition to revoke POA «. As moot. ; Introductory Statement Question 3: Is the Appellant Court allowed to “rephrase” the __ issues on appeal, evidence and or “cause of action” in an attempt to answer for an appellee who failed to file a brief or does this prejudice the Petitioner's ability to receive a | a fair review, thereby violating the 5" and 14* amendments rights. 3.Whether : . * an Appellant Court interfered in the appeals process; is prejudicial and a violation of . Petitioner's due process and 14*equal protection. Introductory Statement Question4: The Petitioner paid for a partial transcript of proceedings and filed a docketing statement to reflect the request for the transcript but, the clerk failed to include it in the record on appeal, the thereby violating the Petitioner's right to due process. The higher court rejected choice of placing the transcript in the