QUESTION NUMBER ONE
How does this Court resolve the absence of appellate
jurisdiction in the proceedings in which the attorney
misconduct is alleged to have occurred, even when,
this Court did not previously find appellate
jurisdiction was lacking?

QUESTION NUMBER TWO
Does the legislative intent and interpretations of
California Code of Civil Procedure § 391 et seq. that
holds those found to be vexatious litigants to what
they have said in court filings differ from California
Business Professional Code § 6068 (d) where bar
members may say one thing in filings and thereafter
change course, and if so, on what legislative basis?

QUESTION NUMBER THREE
What constitutes conflicting decisions of this
California Supreme Court and is there an obligation
imposed on this Court to resolve conflicts in this
Court 's and every other Courts precedent and if not,
why not?

QUESTION NUMBER FOUR
Does the legislative intent govern in California sui
generis proceedings, and if not, why not?

QUESTION NUMBER FIVE
What constitutes a sworn statement filed in a
California State Court proceeding, and if the sworn
statement is found to be false does the false sworn
statement constitute attorney misconduct and also,
require a referral to the California State Bar Court?

QUESTION NUMBER SIX
Does California Business and Professional Code
§ 6106.5 authorize relief from overthrowing the
governments mentions, attempts to overthrow those
governments mention, or both.

QUESTION NUMBER SEVEN
Does a showing of prejudice causing delay in the
enforcement of attorney misconduct proceedings
constitute a class of one claim, and if not, why not?

QUESTION NUMBER EIGHT
Does California Business and Professional Code
§ 6106.1 and § 6115 authorize referrals to the
committee as opposed to the California Commission
on Judicial Misconduct?

QUESTION NUMBER NINTH
Does the lack of California precedent authorizing
recusal or disqualification for the first time during
appellate review establish a complete disregard for
preemption, plausibility, and other precedents of
this United States Supreme Court. Matter of Heff,
197 U.S. 488 (1905); Johnson v. Shelby, Miss., 135
S.Ct. 346 (2014); Caperton v. AT Massey Coal Co.,
Inc., 556 U.S. 868 (2009); Alexander v. Choate, 469
U.S. 287, 295, 299 (1985); Edwards v. Balisok, 520
U.S. 641, 647 (1997); also see, Yagman v. Republic
Ins., 987 F.2d 622, 625 (9th Cir. 1993); Compare,
Athearn v. State Bar, 20 Cal.3d 232, 236 (1977).

How does this Court resolve the absence of appellate jurisdiction in the proceedings in which the attorney misconduct is alleged to have occurred, even when this Court did not previously find appellate jurisdiction was lacking?