Should the Norfolk Circuit Court have granted the petitioner's Motion to Compel Discovery and Continue the Trial

No question identified. : QUESTIONS A. Should the Norfolk Circuit Court have GRANTED the petitioner’s Motion to Compel Discovery and Continue the Trial, to ensure access to Due Process in a case where the State of Virginia was involved in removing from the petitioner both liberty and property? B.Were the Court’s rulings in error by being in conflict with an established Precedent in the New York Court of Appeals,! where a tenant in an older co-op in was also evicted through the use of the same lease clause, but the Court required of the co-op a showing of good faith? C.In light of the cited reasons for requesting leave to file an amended Petition to the Supreme Court of Virginia, in light of the content of her Amended Petition, and if not beyond the scope of this Petition: Should the Supreme Court of Virginia have granted the petitioner leave to file an Amended Petition? D.And in light of the cited reasons for requesting a Rehearing in the Virginia Supreme Court, should that Court have granted her a Rehearing? 1 EXHIBIT A: 40 West 67th Street Corporation v. David Pullman. 22 111.100 N.Y.2d 147, 760 N.¥.S.2d 745, 790 N.E.2d 1174 (2003).