Corruption from outside and/or self corruption

This decision was either based on corruption from outside and/or self corruption of  someone saying look I do whatever I want regardless of what justice requires. The court's explanation for the reasoning behind the  decision contained mainly spinning and avoidance of facts and what is in my answer to the Defendant motion. In addition, it is as if the court intentionally put an effort to go after the few obscure citations but leave out more clear cut citations against the ruling it made. 

 

Again, assuming that court honestly failed to see what someone who only last year knew the bare basics of law can easily find and see, why did it also refused to call for and give an opportunity for the motion to be argued in front of it by both sides. The

Defendant already hired a lawyer so it is not like they will be required to travel like

me.

 

I intend to come later to face any conflict between corruption claims I made earlier and what I am saying now but first I need to show how wrong that decision is.