George A. Saba v. Court of Appeal of California, Fourth Appellate District, Division Three, et al.

Whether a State may impose civil disabilities—including a vexatious-litigant designation, a prefiling order, and a $150,000 security requirement—based on an order issued by a temporary judge who lacked jurisdiction under Article VI, § 21 of the California Constitution, and which omitted all findings required by California Code of Civil Procedure § 391(b).

Whether the First and Fourteenth Amendments are violated when a State denies a litigant any meaningful opportunity for appellate review—where the Court of Appeal summarily denied relief, and the Supreme Court of California refused to permit filing—thereby preventing review of a jurisdictionally void order.

Whether the arbitrary and inconsistent enforcement of California’s vexatious-litigant statutes—including the acceptance of inadmissible hearsay, the rejection of competent personal­ knowledge testimony, the failure to rule on evidentiary objections, and the imposition of a security requirement unsupported by admissible evidence—violates due process and renders the statutory scheme unconstitutionally vague as applied.