1. Whether the Appendix A has discretionaiy jurisdiction to review a decision expressly and directly conflicts with a decision of the Appendix B on the same question of law See. Art. V., (b)(3) Fla Const; Fla R. App. 9.120(a), 9.030(b) (1) (a) (b) (c)(2) (a) (b)(3) (4) (a) (b)

2. How important for the Appendix A to have a Petition Writ of Certiorari to look at the lower court ruling for non-final (interlocutory) decisions according to 28 U.S.C. &1292, and 28 U.S.C.&1291, gives jurisdiction of appeals of final decisions by district courts to the courts of appeals in most cases.

3. There are exceptions to the final judgment rule, however these includes instances in which a trial court commits a plain or fundamental error, questions about whether a trial court has subject-matter jurisdiction, or constitutional questions. According to Appellate Procedure Florida Rule 9.130 (a) (1) (h) Respondents are lawyers in this case they have the power to have the review stop. The pro-se who have long term disability feels her rights and evidence regarding this case is being dismiss by the clerk at Appendix A to keep the review from happening in the Petition of Writ of Certiorari but Taylor v. Board of Pub. Instruction, 131 So. 2d 504 (Fla. 1st DCA 1961) used the common law certiorari to provide relief.

4. U.S. Code & 1257. State Courts; Certiorari (a) Final Judgments or decrees rendered by the highest court of a state in which a decision could be had may be reviewed by the Supreme Court by Writ of Certiorari where the validity of a treaty or statue of any state is drawn in question on the ground of its being repugnant to the Constitution, treaties, or laws of the United States, or where any title, right, privilege, or immunity is specially set up or claimed under the Constitution or the treaties or statutes of, or any commission held, or authority exercised under, the United States.

5. As the Appendix C articulated in Hall v Talcott, 191 So.2d 40,46-47 (Fla.1966). The granting or denial of rehearing is a matter within the sound discretion of the trial court, but it is never an arbitrary decision. As indicated above, when the motion is filed by one against whom a Summary Judgment has been entered, the discretion not to grant is narrowed every disposition should be indulged in favor of granting motion. Only after it has been conclusively shown that the party moved against cannot offer proof to support his position on genuine and material issues in the case should his right to trial be foreclose.

6. U.S. CODE & 2101 (a) A direct appeal to the Supreme Court, from any decision Under section 1253 of this title, holding unconstitutional in whole or in part, any Act of Congress, shall be taken within 30 days after the entiy of the interlocutory or Final order, judgment or decree. The record shall be made up and the case docketed Within 60 days from the time such appeal is taken under rules prescribed by the Supreme Court, (b) Any other direct appeal to the Supreme Court which is authorized by law from a decision

Whether the