Lavonne Washington, et al. v. United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida

Whether a Court of Appeals departs from the "accepted and usual course of judicial proceedings" under Supreme Court Rule 10(a) by summarily issuing a "No Action" order (App. F, 17a) due to technical deficiencies in a Certificate of Interested Persons (CIP), rather than allowing a pro se litigant a reasonable "cure" period as required by Foman v. Davis, 371 U.S. 178 (1962).

Whether the denial of In Forma Pauperis (IFP) status under 28 U.S.C. § 1915 (App. E, 12a)— followed by a "payment under duress" (App. C, 9a)— effectively conditions the right to seek an extraordinary writ on a petitioner's wealth, creating an unconstitutional financial barrier in violation of the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause.

Whether a claim for Mandamus relief is rendered "moot" simply because a lower court eventually acts, where the intermediate "No Action" order created a total suspension of judicial process and forced a "payment under duress" to avoid procedural default—thereby constituting a harm "capable of repetition, yet evading review" under Cheney v. U.S. Dist. Court, 542 U.S. 367 (2004).

Whether a court’s inherent power to sanction participants who abuse the judicial process, as established in Chambers v. NASCO, Inc., 501 U.S. 32 (1991), is erroneously limited by shielding a central participant from accountability solely because they were not formally named as a "party" to the mandamus proceeding (App. B, 4a).