a. Under what circumstances is it appropriate for the courts to refuse accommodation to the disabled?

b. Can a trustee in a bankruptcy matter use personal funds to purchase property for an estate?

c. Must non judicial foreclosure follow the letter of the laws pertaining thereto?

d. Is court bias against the wrongfully foreclosed excusable, and if so, in what circumstances?

e. Are bankruptcy exemptions subject to judicial discretion?

f. Is the inability to afford the costs of depositions a barrier to a fair trial?

g. Can a party who expressed interest in purchasing a property scheduled for foreclosure, but who then declined to bid, be questioned about price rigging within an adversary proceeding involving the buyer?

h. Can third party buyers be held liable for damages in matters of wrongful foreclosure?

i. Is it ever appropriate for a bankruptcy trustee to demand escrowed rents from tenants in cash?

j. Is having and maintaining safe, secure housing implicit relative to the right to pursue happiness?

k. Does an officer of the Court have discretion to act outside of court authorized orders? And if so, under what circumstances?

l. Can mortgagors be held liable for "forcing borrowers into bankruptcy"?

m. Are Registers of Deeds accountable to the courts? And if so, how?

n. Under what circumstances can tenants be threatened to vacate a foreclosed property?

o. When, if ever, is it appropriate to displace a disabled person from their lawfully occupied home?

p. When, exactly, does the sale of a property occur?

q. Is an officer of the courts personally liable for knowingly making false representations, material omissions, or engaging in other illegal acts?

r. Are systemically important, too-big-to fail banks omnipotent?

1. Matters of due process are raised as to whether the appeal qualifies as frivolous/not in good faith.

2. Constitutional matters are raised concerning property rights, indigent court costs law, Woods' state law right to the quiet enjoyment of her home, and "burdened rights".

3. Matters of jurisdiction are raised as to "voidness".

A. Did the judge err by applying the wrong standard to Woods's forma pauperis by requiring of her, because she is indigent, a litmus test on her right to appeal which is not applied to those similarly situated who are not indigent (an apparent violation of equal protection and due process, Amendments XIV and V)?

B. Did the judge err in apparently relying on opposing bankruptcy trustee's characterizations of Woods as litigious, when, beyond her control and against her best judgment and, actually, physical capacity, bankruptcy rules require appeal of every interlocutory decision, or you waive your appeal rights?

C. Did the judge err in declaring Woods's appeals frivolous or vexatious, if such a standard could even Constitutionally be applied, given the following:

1. The jurisdictional issue of whether the bankruptcy judge can apply Federal equity powers where a plain, adequate and complete remedy at law exists?

2. The jurisdictional issue of whether the bankruptcy judge can exercise her Federal equity powers over a province of state law, where a state law provides a plain, adequate and complete remedy?

3. Where issues as to the lower court's jurisdiction had been raised, could the judge foreclose on Woods's right to appeal for the benefit of the court, where the only question with a forma pauperis is the use of court resources going forward?

4. Where the question of the lower court's jurisdiction was a central issue in the appeal, is it not a removal of Woods's due

Under what circumstances is it appropriate for the courts to refuse accommodation to the disabled?