Did lower courts err in allowing Alex and Connie Trail's claim as creditor to stand, after their attorneys filed unreasonable fees of a supplemental judgment and money award they obtained deceptively using obscure Oregon Revised Statutes?

Questions Presented 1. Did lower courts error for allowing Alex and Connie Trail’s claim as Creditor to stand, after their Attorneys filled unreasonable fees of a SUPPLEMENTAL JUDGEMENT AND MONEY AWARD they obtained deceptively using obscure Oregon Revised Statutes to blame Webster for a missing stake which they presented as proof of claim, after the Trail’s and their Attorney’s knew webster was not responsible and besides Azonia Haney promptly had the stake replaced according to the statute invalidating Trail’s lawsuit and without an Evidentiarily Hearing as required in Contested Matter’s, proving false claims gaining protections of 18 USC 152(4), “knowingly and fraudulently presents any false claim for proof against the estate of a debtor”? 2. Did inferior courts error by prematurely dismissing and closing webster’s bankruptcy without discharge after his filings of his indisputable Qualifying Life Event on April 15, 2020 from the Novel Corona Virus — aka (COVID 19), after laying the foundation to a qualified claim by operation of law to a full-discharge from his presumed debt with all the force and effect of a “force majeure” after the world-wide destruction events to the supply chains, causing hyperinflation, shortages, hunger, stifling or collapsing nearly all Business inflating the cost of living? 1| Page Petition on Writ for Bill of Certiorari for De Novo Review brent evan webster v. ALEX & CONNIE TRAIL Application No. 21A624