Did the trial court violate Elizabeth Fitzgrebon's due process and equal protection rights under the Fourteenth Amendment by losing the parties' final Marital Settlement Agreement, incorrectly granting a divorce, fabricating a new MSA, falsely attributing approval to a retired Commissioner, and backdating a divorce judgment?

' *"" ! Ii f I > ' 1’. .Did;'-the trial court violate Elizabeth Fitzgrebon's due process and equal protection rights :under the Fourteenth Amendment by: . b i \ • Losing the parties ’ final and intended Marital Settlement Agreement (MSA) for their uncontested divorce; • Incorrectly granting a divorce based on a previously nullified agreement; • Fabricating a new and inequitable MSA based on false testimony to replace the document lost by the court; • Falsely attributing approval of the fabricated MSA to a long-retired Family Court Commissioner (FCC) who had never reviewed it; • Backdating a new divorce judgment without consent or proper trial; ...thereby depriving Elizabeth of her constitutional right to a lawful and voluntary dissolution of marriage? 2. When a state court disregards its own binding contractual obligations by failing to follow its own civil and criminal statutes —including those prohibiting fraud and forgery —does such conduct violate the Contract Clause of Article I, Section 10 and thereby warrant federal review where the state has failed to provide relief? 3. When a state court acts simultaneously as both adjudicator and interested party in a dispute —such as through financial or institutional entanglements —does this structural conflict of interest violate the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and warrant federal review where the state has failed to provide relief?