Whether the lower courts violated the petitioner's civil rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983

QUESTIONS PRESENTED , The Supreme Court of New Jersey denied Petitioners, Petition for Certification, from a decision of the Superior Court of New Jersey Appellate Division. That opinion includes contradicting conclusions of law, ignores all evidences presented on the finding of the same facts. Petitioner's Constitutional Rights to due process; (fair treatment through the normal judicial system, especially as a citizen's entitlement) has raised questions as follows: 1. Whether the Superior Court of New Jersey Appellate Division, and Supreme Court of New Jersey, denial opinion and orders violate the civil rights of the petitioner as protected by The Civil Rights Act of 1871 a federal statute—numbered 42 U.S.C. § 1983Civil action for deprivation of rights? ii 2. Whether the lower trial courts Somerset, and Middlesex Superior courts violated Petitioners, of his Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendment Constitutional Rights and “deprived him of life, liberty or property without due process of law" in reaching its decision, opinion, and orders in this case, or is the conduct outside the scope of the law? 3. Whether the Superior Court Of New Jersey Appellate Division decision, opinion, and order be overturned because it conflicts with precedent from this court or other courts? 4. Whether the lower Somerset, and Middlesex Superior court’s decision be overturned because it creates a circuit split with other courts on this issue raised by petitioner? iii 5. Whether the issues presented in this case of sufficient importance to warrant review by this court? 6. Whether the judges in question engaged in misconduct as alleged in the petition? 7. Whether if the judges engaged in misconduct, did it rise to the level of a due process violation? 8. Whether the lower court’s decision on the issue of judicial misconduct be overturned because it conflicts with precedent from this Court or other courts? 9. Whether the issues of judicial ethics misconduct, malfeasance, and impropriety in this case of sufficient importance to warrant review by this court? iv 10. Whether the petitioners, petition, raised a novel or unsettled question of law that would benefit from the Court’s review? 11. Whether the judges in question be disqualified from the proceedings in this case, and their orders entered be set aside? 12. Whether the judges in question be subject to disciplinary action for their alleged misconduct, misbehavior, and malfeasance? 13. Whether the lower court’s precedent, interpretation of the provisions of the estate, and irrevocable trust agreement regarding John L. Marchisotto, deceased correct? 14. Whether the lower court’s correctly applied applicable state, and federal laws in its determination of the estate, and irrevocable Vv trust agreement regarding John L. Marchisotto, deceased? 15. Whether the lower court’s decision be overturned because it conflicts with precedent from this Court or other courts on the issues of estate, and irrevocable trust cases? 16. Whether the lower court’s malfeasance determination of order sanctioning the Pro se plaintiff to pay $81,841.72 and the additional $3,000 in expenses and costs to respondents an abuse of discretion, setting a bad precdent? 17. Whether the Superior Court Of New Jersey Appellate Division, Supreme Court of New Jersey, and Superior Somerset/Middlesex lower courts judges malfeasance had failed to properly consider relevant evidence in the determination of the Petitioners case, appeal, and to only deny him, and the minor children, subpoenas, a trial, and justice vi of: In the Matter of the Irrevocable Trust of John L. Marchisotto, deceased?