Whether the Appellate Court's failure to acknowledge the plain error of Woodfords bringing a defective and improper motion and that the lower court allowing the defective motion to proceed was a fundamental error denying Gladden of Due Process rights?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Whether the Appellate Court’s failure to acknowledge the plain error of Woodfords bringing a defective and improper motion and that the lower court allowing the defective motion to proceed was a fundamental error denying Gladden of Due Process rights? 2. Whether the judge violated rules in treating Gladden, who is Pro Se litigant in a biased and harsh manner as reflected through judicial application of legal standards? 3. Whether the Ex Parte Communication between the Woodfords and Judge violated Gladden’s fundamental rights? 4, Whether the Clerk’s Office failure to issue a Deficiency Notice to Woodfords for failing to Serve a Copy of their Communication to Gladden further violates Gladden’s Due Process rights? 5. Whether Judge Treating Ex Parte Communication with Woodfords Communication from Woodfords titled “Correspondence Requesting Corrected Order” as Motion further violated Gladden’s fundamental rights? 6. Whether Judge Issuing Amended Order 2 Days After Receiving Woodford’s after receiving Woodfords’ “Correspondence Requesting Corrected Order” further violated Gladden’s fundamental rights in that Gladden did not receive notice and the Order was changed within 2 days further preventing Gladden an opportunity to be heard in violation of Due Process rights? 7. Whether the multiple judicial transgressions during court proceedings warrants a vacatur of the ruling?