whether-appeals-court-retain-authority-over-moot-claims

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED QUESTION ONE: ; WHETHER AN APPEALS COURT MAY CONSTITUTIONALLY JN ERROR RETAIN AUTHORITY OVER SUMMARY JUDGMENT ACTIONS THAT INCLUDES MOOT EXCLUDED HEARSAY CLAIM CONTENT THAT CANNOT QUALIFY AS A “CLAIM OR CONTROVERSY " UNDER ARTICLE III, SECTION li, OF THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION AND TITLE VIl OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1964, DUE TO LACK OF JURISDICTION AND OBITER DICTA REFERENCE TO MOOT HEARSAY ON THE : RECORD. QUESTION TWO: WHETHER THE APPEALS COURT COMMITTED REVERSIBLE ERROR IN CONCLUDING APPELLANTS CLAIMS UNDER TITLE VII PARTICIPATION AND OPPOSITION CLAUSE DID NOT CONSTITUTE PROTECTED ACTIVITY FOR APPELLANTS FAILURE TO FILE A PENDING EEOC CHARGE PRIOR TO ENGAGING IN EMPLOYER'S INTERNAL INVESTIGATION, HEARING, OR PROCEEDING IN ANY MANNER UNDER THE STATUTE. QUESTION THREE: WHETHER THE APPEALS COURT COMMITTED REVERSIBLE ERROR BY DISMISSING APPELLANTS APPEAL BASED ON AN INCORRECT APPLICATION OF TITLE Vil LAW, | 42 U.S.C. SECTIONS 2000€-3 (A) AND 42 U.S.C, ZOOOE2 ( A) OF THE OPPOSITION AND THE PARTICIPATION CLAUSE PROTECTING EMPLOYEE'S WHO SPEAK-OUT IN EMPLOYERS INTERNAL INVESTIGATION OF ALLEGE RETALIATORY HARASSMENT UNDER THE PARTICIPATION CLAUSE OF TITLE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1964. QUESTION FOUR: WHETHER THE APPEALS COURT ERRORED IN APPELLANTS CASE WAS BASED ON AN INCORRECT STANDARD OF REVIEW, AS OPPOSED TO THE CORRECT 1 | CLEARLY ERRONOUS STANDARD OF REVIEW AND THE, BUT FOR, CAUSATION TEST, AND THE PROPOUNDER OF THE EVIDENCE STANDARD, REQUIRED TO PROVE RETALIATION CAUSE OF ACTION. , QUESTION FIVE: WHETHER THE APPEALS COURT OVERLOOKED IN ERROR THE MATERIAL FACTUAL OR LEGAL MATTER OF EXCEPTIONAL IMPORTANCE ALLOWING OF PUNITIVE DAMAGES IN TITLE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1964, FOR MALICIOUSLY FRAUDLENT, RECKLESS INDIFFERENCE OF AGGAVATING FACTOR OF FRAUDULENT INDIFFERENCE IN A CONSTRUCUIVE DISCHARGE CLAIM. | | | | | | | | 2