STATEMENT OF THE CASE This Case and
Judgment should and must be reviewed not just for the interest or Rights of Defendant / Plaintiff but for the public policy and trust, because of the lies, perjury, material misstatements of facts, false
documents, conspiracy, violations of Federal and State, Constitutional and Civil Rights of poor minority, black and people of color, using the Court and legal system to cover-up and hide their unlawful banking
and other violations under "Color of State Law" in a gross attempt to obstruct justice.The Second Circuit Court of Appeal has rule that Lucien's Attorneys Emile Turner Jr. and Mr. Wilbur Babin Jr. were aware
of these violations (thus a violation of the Code of Professional Ethics) as well as every Attorney and Official in this case is aware of the Ruling by the Disciplinary Board of the Louisiana State Bar
Association No. 96-DB-081, September 19, 1997 andMotion for Recusal. (See attached Exhibit 1 –2) Judge Scott Crichton because of his personal problem was bias and could not be fair in his Judgment of Lucien. This is clearly a
case of "Denial of Due Process" and Equal Protection of the Law", {because of race}. As all parties and Officials were white except the original Judge Stewart who was completely deceived, mislead,
and recklessly, deliberately lied to through presentation of forged and falsified documents, misstatement of facts and suppression of the truth.
The Court acts for its own protection and ultimate protection of the public Interest (LA. CC Art. 1953), as all of their Judgments is contrary to Public Policy. These allegations cannot be excused simply, by denying Lucien his
day in Court by deceiving and committing fraud on the Court. By pleading Exception of No Cause and No Right of Action, Prescription and Res Judicata.Cited Cases: Rhodes v. Miller No. 34237 Supreme Court of Louisiana
February 7, 1938 [7] EQUITY-The recognized rule that every suitor who seeks equitable
relief must himself be free from any unlawful or inequitable conduct with respect to the matter or transaction is known in equity as rule of "clean hands".—[8] EQUITY-The rule that every suitor who seeks equitable
reliefmust himself be free from any unlawful or inequitable conduct is not applied because it is a matter of defense, but because it is against public policy to hear the cause if the unconscionable character of the matter or
transaction be established. U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit rule that parties perpetrating fraud on the Court Case No. 96-30420 MAC Sales, Inc., ET AL, -Plaintiffs,
Kenneth P. Choina, Sr., - Plaintiff/Appellant Versus E.I. Dupont DE Nemours and Company Defendant/Appellee The circuit court stated that: This case is extraordinary, in that the sole evidence supporting a multi-million
dollar verdict is the clearly fraudulent testimony of an expert witness who supplied Defense Counsel with fraudulent documents that prevented Defendant from fully presenting its case.
Allowing this verdict to stand would cause substantial injustice. The Court will not sit idly by and allow Mr. Trappey to visit this injustice on the Defendant or the Court. That not only is the
Defendant injured in this event, but the entire Judicial System and the Court suffers as a result. |
 |
