IN THE COURT OF APPEALS, MARYLAND Petitioner v. Centex Homes, a Nevada General Partnership, (hereinafter “Centex”) - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dear Honorable Chief Judge and all Judges in the Maryland Court of Appeals: We wish and are petitioning to grant Petitioner’s current and future “Petition of Writ of Certiorari”, against home builder Centex and related petitions; which the public is both interested in and desires. Petitioner is a victim of Centex’s unlawful actions and sued Centex in the Circuit Court of Maryland, where Judge dismissed the lawsuit without having stated any fact or law, without the legal procedure known as Discovery, without any ruling on the lawsuit merits, and without proper “due process” established and protected by the Constitution. Petitioner appealed the decision in the Court of Special Appeals, Maryland, where the Judge dismissed the suit because it was “not timely appealed”. Petitioner claimed, provided many evidences, and proved the fact that the Circuit Court clerk/officer’s errors were what caused the Petitioner to have “not timely appealed”. Both the respondent Centex and the Judge of MD Court of Special Appeals did not dispute, did not oppose, and were “contented” with : (1) The fact that the Circuit Court’s officer’s errors caused the Petitioner to have “not timely appealed”; and (2) Any and all quoted laws support the fact that the Court should not penalize the Petitioner and the suit, whose dismissal was caused by the court officer/clerk’s errors. At the dismissal rulings, the Chief Judge Krauser of the Maryland Court of Special Appeals intentionally did not state that the undisputed and proved material facts of the Circuit Court clerk/officer’s errors were what caused the Petitioner to have “not timely appealed”; and did not comply with many laws quoted in the petitioner’s appeal. We wish and are petitioning the Honorable Chief Judge and all Judges of the Maryland Court of Appeals, to: 1. Grant petitioner’s “Petition of Writ of Certiorari”; 2. Determine whether a Judge and a Chief Judge could legally: (1) Intentionally violate “Judgment on partial findings”, (see Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, “Rule 52, Findings and Conclusions by the Court; Judgment on partial findings”); (2) Judges “are considered, in law, as trespassers”, -- See and quote statutes from U.S. Supreme Court Elliott v. Peirsol's Lessee26 U.S. 328, 1828 WL 3002, U.S.,1828, and many other courts’ rulings: “…. But if it act without authority, its judgments and orders are regarded as nullities. They are not voidable, but simply void; and form no bar to a remedy sought in opposition to them, even prior to a reversal. They constitute no justification; and all persons concerned in executing such judgments, or sentences, are considered, in law, as trespassers.” ... “The clerk of Woodford County Court, has no authority to alter the record of the acknowledgment of a deed, at any time after the record is made.”; and (3) Defy laws. 3. Protect the equal rights of a weak party, a minority; in this case, an Asian American woman and petitioner, in courts; and 4. Give the public some confidence in the judicial system. At the same time, please tell your friends, relatives, and co-workers about home builder Centex’s intentional poor treatment of weak parties. Sincerely,