1. Whether a state court's dismissal order, absent clear languages about the legal effects; and its further refusal to clarify - which has led to four years' appellate litigations - violate notice requirement of procedural due process as set out in the Fourteenth Amendments' Due Process Clause?

2. Whether the Court has authority to further rule on the merits of the claims and dismiss the unrepresented children's claims, after it has announced lacking personal jurisdiction over defendants.

3. Whether the Court has personal jurisdiction over a disabled minor who was unrepresented by legal lawyer and guardian ad litem - while all federal circuits dismissed the unrepresented minors' claims without prejudice because pro se parents are not permitted to represented minors in both federal and state courts. 28 U.S.C. § 1654; RCW 2.48.180.

4. Whether the Court is under the duty to first resolve the jurisdictional issue before ruling on the merits of the case.

5. Whether it is unconstitutional for the state Court to impose legal financial sanction upon the passive indigent Respondents who were forced to respond to the interlocutory appeal - if any appellate costs - completely occurred by the appellants themselves.

Whether a state court's dismissal order, absent clear languages about the legal effects, and its further refusal to clarify — which has led to four years' appellate litigations violate notice requirement of procedural due process as set out in the Fourteenth Amendments' Due Process Clause?