Do animal 'adoption' laws conflict with the Constitution's Contract Clause and the general principles of contracting?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Do animal “adoption” laws conflict with the Constitution’s Contract Clause and the general : principles of contracting? 2. Did the court flout this Court’s standard in : Iqbal/Twombly when they dismissed several of McCabe’s claims? . : 8. Did the court misapply statutory procedures that . are reserved for county procurement contract claims, : to prevent McCabe from asserting contract claims against Fairfax County? , 4. This Court has ruled that counties, when acting as : arms of the state, are not entitled to absolute immunity (‘sovereign immunity”) from tort claims when engaged in proprietary and commercial functions. The commercial importation and resale of a violent pit bull is not a protected government ; function. Did the Virginia courts violate this Court’s precedent when they dismissed all tort claims against | ; Fairfax County? 5. The Fairfax County Animal Shelter (““FCAS”), who sold a violent pit bull dog, is an instrumentality of Fairfax County. The court asserted that FCAS was a non sui juris entity and thus, was not capable ofbeing sued, and dismissed all contract and tort claims against FCAS. Did the courts violate the general principles of contracting and the Uniform Commercial ii Code (“UCC”) when they dismissed all claims against : FCAS? 6. This Court has ruled that legislative immunity is not applicable to activities pertaining to employee hiring, discipling and firing. Did the Virginia courts : ; violate this Court’s precedent and flout statutory law . : when they dismissed the gross negligence claim ; against the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors (“BOS”)? 7. Did the Virginia courts flout state law and create friction between the states when they dismissed all UCC claims against all respondents? 8. This Court has defined specific standards needed to assert a “failure to warn" product liability claim. Virginia has no statutory product liability laws. Did . the court abuse its discretion when it dismissed the product liability claim based on a theory McCabe did not allege? lii ;