cala_logo
title

Home

JOIN US TODAY

THE WHOLE TRUTH and NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH


LOUISIANA REVISED STATUE

35:4- NOTARIES CONNECTED WITH BANKS AND OTHER CORPORATIONS

POWERS: " It is lawful for any Notary Public who is a stockholder, director, officer, or employee of a bank or other corporation to take the acknowledgement of any party to any written instrument executed to or by such corporation, or to administer an oath to any other stockholder, director, officer, employee or agent of such a corporation, or to protest for non acceptance or non payment, bills of exchange, drafts, checks, notes, and other negotiable instruments which may be owned or held for collection by such corporation"

                   " It is unlawful for any Notary Public, to take the acknowledgement of an instrument, by or to a bank or other corporation of which he is a stockholder, officer, director, or employee, where the Notary is a party to such instrument, either individually, as an employee, or as a representative of such a corporation."


April 12, 1998
Proof and Evidence is Recklessly Ignored and Denied

GLASS-SLEAGALL ACT

Mr. Lucien continuously and always maintained that he never had a fair Hearing. a State Agency hearing has been held and proved by evidence that the Judgment against Lucien was adjudicated by a Judge who because of personal, financial and professional reasons could not be fair and unbias which no doubt denied Lucien his Civil and Legal Rights of Due process guaranteed by the 14th Amendment to "Equal Protection under the Law".

(See Ruling Bar Association, dated  September 19th &  29th 1997 # 96-DB-081).

It is well settled by the Federal and State Laws that Judgments based on fraud, perjury and obstruction of Justice cannot be allowed to stand.

(See Case #  U.S. Court of Appeal 5th Circuit 96-30420, (89-CV-4571-N, MC Sales,  Inc. (V) E. I. Dupont  DE-Nemours).

We have positive proof that this Bank (Deposit Guaranty) was involved in fraud, collusion, intimidation, perjury, extortion and conspiracy to cover-up these violations using the Court and Legal Systems. What's so amazing is how the Bank can publicly deny and continue in the face of all these documents, testimonies and evidence to display it's prejudice, biased and unequal treatment of poor Blacks and minority.

Citizens, by knowingly lying to obstruct justice and still remain above the Law. They could easily clear up these allegations by producing records and Loan documents.

"The Glass-Sleagall Act", among others were violated when at the Closing Commercial National Bank) rejected their requirement of Permanent Financing upon completion, in order to gain an equity position in hope of a larger and more lucrative Contract for their Director; plus additional fees and interest for the Bank.Audubon Meadow was never nor was it contracted to repay (Commercial National Bank) that Loan, it was interim financing. The Commitment and Agreement called for a Permanent Lender, which would have paid (Commercial National Bank) in full, had the Bank performed its commitment in good faith. They never would have sustained a lost.What they chose to do was to become a silent Partner with their friend and Client Mr. Bill Dupree, whom (Commercial National Bank) through their Attorneys Cook, Yancey, King and Galloway and Director Mr. William Peatross represented throughout this Loan process without any Disclosures of Conflict of Interest and Truth and Lending as required by Law.

(See documents-Ledger Sheets, invoices along with approved repayment schedule which preceded the unauthorized hand (Note) executed two (2) years after the Loan June 1996 due 6 months later December 1996.


LOUISIANA LAWS GOVERNING NOTARIZATION

Louisiana Revised Statue 35:4

It is lawful for any notary public who is a stockholder, director, officer, or employee of a bank or other corporation to take the acknowledgement of any party to any written instrument executed to or by such corporation, or to administer an oath to any other stockholder, director, officer, employee, or agent of such corporation, or to protest for non-acceptance or nonpaymnet bills of exchange, drafts, checks, notes, and other negotiable instruments which may be owned or held for collection by such corportaion. "It is unlawful for any notary public to take the acknowledgement of an instrument by or to a bank or other corporation of which he is a stockholder, director, officer, or employee, where the notary is a party to such instrument, either individually or as a representative of such corporation, or to protest any negotiable instrument owned or held for collection by the corporation, where the notary is individually a party to the instrument."

Art. 1835

Authentic act constitutes full proof between parties and heirs

An authentic act constitutes full proof of the agreement it contains, as against the parties, their heirs, and successors by universal of particular title.

Acts 1984, No. 331, & 1.

Comments

    (a) This Article reproduces the substance of C.C. Art. 2236 (1870). It does not change the law.

    (b) This Article eliminates the reference to forged acts found in C.C. Art. 2236 (1870). A forged act is of course not authentic and can have no evidentiary effect. An act made through a vice of consent is in the same position. See comments under revised C.C.Art.1948,(Rev.1984),infra.

CCP. Art. 371. Attorney

An Attorney at law is an officer of the court. He shall conduct himself at all times with decorum, and in a manner consistent with the dignity and authority of the court and the role which he himself should play in the administration of justice.

He shall treat the court, its officers, jurors, witnesses, opposing party, and opposing counsel with due respect; shall not interrupt opposing counsel, or otherwise interfere with or impede the orderly dispatch of judicial business by the court; shall not knowingly encourage or produce false evidence; and shall not knowingly make any misrepresentation, or otherwise impose upon or deceive the court.

For a violation of any of the provisions of this article, the attorney at law subjects himself to punishment for contempt of court, and such further disciplinary action as is otherwise provided by law. Source: New; cf. C.P. Art. 486. 


U.S. CODE, TITLE 18

SECTION 215

Receipt of commissions or gifts for procuring loans

Whoever-

    (1) corruptly gives, offers, or promises anything of value to any person, with intent to influence or reward an officer, director, employee, agent, or attorney of a financial institution in connection with any business or transaction of such institution; or

    (2) as an officer, director, employee, agent, or attorney of a financial institution, corruptly solicits or demands for the benefit of any person, or corruptly accepts or agrees to accept, anything of value from any person, intending to be influenced or rewarded in connection with any business or transaction of such institution; shall be fined not more than $1,000,000 or three times the value of the thing given, offered, promised, solicited, demanded, accepted, or agreed to be accepted, whichever is greater, or imprisoned not more than 30 years, or both, but if the value of the thing given, offered, promised, solicited, demanded, accepted, or agreed to be accepted does not exceed $1,000, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.

      (b) Transferred

      (c) This section shall not apply to bona fide salary, wages, fees, or other compensation paid, or expenses paid or reimbursed, in the usual course of business.

      (d) Federal agencies with responsibility for regulating a financial institution shall jointly establish such guidelines as are appropriate to assist an officer, director, employee, agent, or attorney of a financial institution to comply with this section. Such agencies shall make such guidelines available to the public.

SECTION 1001

Statements or entries generally

(a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, whoever, in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive legislative, or judicial branch of the Government of the United States, knowingly and willfully -

(1) falsifies, conceals, or covers up by and trick, scheme, or device a material fact;

(2) makes any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation; or

(3) makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the same to contain any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or entry; shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.

SECTION 1002

Possession of false papers to defraud United States

Whoever, knowingly and with intent to defraud the United States, or any agency thereof, possesses any false, altered, forged, or counterfeited writing or document for the purpose of enabling another to obtain from the United States, or from any agency, officer or agent thereof, any sum of money, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

SECTION 1005

Bank entries, reports and transactions

Whoever, being an officer, director, agent or employee of any Federal Reserve bank, member bank, depository institution holding company, national bank, insured bank, branch or agency of a foreign bank, or organization operating under section 25 or section 25(a) of the Federal Reserve Act without authority from the directors of such bank, branch, agency, or organization or company, issues or puts in circulation any notes of such bank, branch, agency, or organization or company.

SECTION 1014

The penalty for making false statements for the purpose of influencing the action of any bank insured by FDIC are defined in the U.S. Code; TItle 18, Sec: 1014 as: A fine of $5,000.00 or imprisonment of not more than 10 years or both.

SECTION 1016

Acknowledgment of appearance or oath

Whoever, being an officer authorized to administer oaths or to take and certify acknowledgments, knowingly makes any false acknowledgment, certificate, or statement concerning the appearance before him or the taking of an oath or affirmation by any person with respect to any proposal, contract, bond, undertaking, or other matter submitted to, made with, or taken on behalf of the United States or any department or agency thereof, concerning which an oath or affirmation is required by law or lawful regulation, or with respect to the financial standing of any principal, surety, or other party to any such proposal, contract, bond, undertaking, or other instrument, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.

SECTION 1341.

Frauds and swindles

Whoever, having devised or intending to devise any scheme or artifice to defraud, or for obtaining money or property by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises, or to sell, dispose of, loan, exchange, alter, give away, distribute, supply, or furnish or procure for unlawful use any counterfeit or spurious coin, obligation, security, or other article, or anything represented to be or intimated or held out to be such counterfeit or spurious article, for the purpose of executing such scheme or artifice or attempting so to do, places in any past office or authorized depository for mail matter, any matter or thing whatever to be sent or delivered by the Postal Service, or deposits or causes to be deposited any matter or thing whatever to be sent or delivered by any private or commercial interstate carrier, or takes or receives therefrom, any such matter or thing, or knowingly causes to be delivered by mail or such carrier according to the direction thereon, or at the place at which it is directed to be delivered by the person to whom it is addressed, any such matter or thing, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both. If the violation affects a financial institution, such person shall be fined not more than $1,000,000 or imprisoned not more than 30 years, or both.


Rule 3.03
Candor Toward the Tribunal

A. A lawyer shall not knowingly:

  • make a false statement of material fact or law to a tribunal;
  • fail to disclose a fact to a tribunal when disclosure is necessary to avoid assisting a criminal or fraudulent act;
  • in an ex parte proceeding, fail to disclose to the tribunal an unprivileged fact which the lawyer reasonably believes should be known by that entity for it to make an informed decision;
  • fail to disclose to the tribunal authority in the controlling jurisdiction known to the lawyer to be directly adverse to the position of the client and not disclosed by opposing counsel; or
  • offer or use evidence that the lawyer knows to be false.

B. If a lawyer has offered material evidence and comes to know of its falsity, the lawyer shall make a good faith effort to persuade the client to authorize the lawyer to correct or withdraw the false evidence. If such efforts are unsuccessful, the lawyer shall take reasonable remedial measures, including disclosure of the true facts.

C.The duties stated in paragraphs (A) and (B) continue until remedial legal measures are no longer reasonably possible.

Comment:

1. The advocate's task is to present the client's case with persuasive force. Performance of that duty while maintaining confidences of the client is qualified by the advocate's duty of candor to the tribunal.

Factual Representations by a Lawyer

2. An advocate is responsible for pleadings and other documents prepared for litigation, but is usually not required to have personal knowledge of matters asserted therein, for litigation documents ordinarily present assertions by the client, or by someone on the client's behalf, and not assertions by the lawyer. Compare Rule 3.01. However, an assertion purporting to be on the lawyer's own knowledge, as in an affidavit by the lawyer or a representation of fact in open court, may properly be made only when the lawyer knows the assertion is true or believes it to be true on the basis of a reasonably diligent inquiry. There are circumstances where failure to make a disclosure is the equivalent of an affirmative misrepresentation. The obligation prescribed in Rule 1.02(c) not to counsel a client to commit or assist the client in committing a fraud applies in litigation. See the Comments to Rules 1.02(c) and 8.04(a).

Misleading Legal Argument

3. Legal argument based on a knowingly false representation of law constitutes dishonesty toward the tribunal. A lawyer is not required to make a disinterested exposition of the law, but should recognize the existence of pertinent legal authorities. Furthermore, as stated in paragraph (a)(4), an advocate has a duty to disclose directly adverse authority in the controlling jurisdiction which has not been disclosed by the opposing party. The underlying concept is that legal argument is a discussion seeking to determine the legal premises properly applicable to the case.

Ex Parte Proceedings

4. Ordinarily, an advocate has the limited responsibility of presenting one side of the matters that a tribunal should consider in reaching a decision; the conflicting position is expected to be presented by the opposing party. However, in an ex parte proceeding, such as an application for a temporary restraining order, there is no balance of presentation by opposing advocates. The object of an ex parte proceeding is nevertheless to yield a substantially just result. The judge has an affirmative responsibility to accord the absent party just consideration. The lawyer for the represented party has the correlative duty to make disclosures of unprivileged material facts known to the lawyer if the lawyer reasonably believes the tribunal will not reach a just decision unless informed of those facts.

Anticipated False Evidence

5. On occasion a lawyer may be asked to place into evidence testimony or other material that the lawyer knows to be false. Initially in such situations, a lawyer should urge the client or other person involved to not offer false or fabricated evidence. However, whether such evidence is provided by the client or by another person, the lawyer must refuse to offer it, regardless of the client's wishes. As to a lawyer's right to refuse to offer testimony or other evidence that the lawyer believes is false, see paragraph 15 of this Comment.

6. If the request to place false testimony or other material into evidence came from the lawyer's client, the lawyer also would be justified in seeking to withdraw from the case. See Rules 1.15(a)(1) and (b)(2), (4). If withdrawal is allowed by the tribunal, the lawyer may be authorized under Rule 1.05(c)(7) to reveal the reasons for that withdrawal to any other lawyer subsequently retained by the client in the matter; but normally that rule would not allow the lawyer to reveal that information to another person or to the tribunal. If the lawyer either chooses not to withdraw or is not allowed to do so by the tribunal, the lawyer should again urge the client not to offer false testimony or other evidence and advise the client of the steps the lawyer will take if such false evidence is offered. Even though the lawyer does not receive satisfactory assurances that the client or other witness will testify truthfully as to a particular matter, the lawyer may use that person as a witness as to other matters that the lawyer believes will not result in perjured testimony.

Past False Evidence

7. It is possible, however, that a lawyer will place testimony or other material into evidence and only later learn of its falsity. When such testimony or other evidence is offered by the client, problems arise between the lawyer's duty to keep the client's revelations confidential and the lawyer's duty of candor to the tribunal. Under this Rule, upon ascertaining that material testimony or other evidence is false, the lawyer must first seek to persuade the client to correct the false testimony or to withdraw the false evidence. If the persuasion is ineffective, the lawyer must take additional remedial measures.

8. When a lawyer learns that the lawyer's services have been improperly utilized in a civil case to place false testimony or other material into evidence, the rule generally recognized is that the lawyer must disclose the existence of the deception to the court or to the other party, if necessary rectify the deception. See paragraph (b) and Rule 1.05(h). See also Rule 1.05(g). Such a disclosure can result in grave consequences to the client, including not only a sense of betrayal by the lawyer but also loss of the case and perhaps a prosecution for perjury. But the alternative is that the lawyer would be aiding in the deception of the tribunal or jury, thereby subverting the truth-finding process which the adversary system is designed to implement. See Rule 1.02(c). Furthermore, unless it is clearly understood that the lawyer will act upon the duty to disclose the existence of false evidence, the client can simply reject the lawyer's advice to reveal the false evidence and insist that the lawyer keep silent. Thus the client could in effect coerce the lawyer into being a party to fraud on the court.

Perjury by a Criminal Defendant

9. Whether an advocate for a criminally accused has the same duty of disclosure has been intensely debated. While it is agreed that in such cases, as in others, the lawyer should seek to persuade the client to refrain from suborning or offering perjurious testimony or other false evidence, there has been dispute concerning the lawyer's duty when that persuasion fails. If the confrontation with the client occurs before trial, the lawyer ordinarily can withdraw. Withdrawal before trial may not be possible, however, either because trial is imminent, or because the confrontation with the client does not take place until the trial itself, or because no other counsel is available.

10. The proper resolution of the lawyer's dilemma in criminal cases is complicated by two considerations. The first is the substantial penalties that a criminal accused will face upon conviction, and the lawyer's resulting reluctance to impair any defenses the accused wishes to offer on his own behalf having any possible basis in fact. The second is the right of a defendant to take the stand should he so desire, even over the objections of the lawyer. Consequently, in any criminal case where the accused either insists on testifying when the lawyer knows that the testimony is perjurious or else surprises the lawyer with such testimony at trial, the lawyer's effort to rectify the situation can increase the likelihood of the client's being convicted as well as opening the possibility of a prosecution for perjury. On the other hand, if the lawyer does not exercise control over the proof, the lawyer participates, although in a merely passive way, in deception of the court.

11. Three resolutions of this dilemma have been proposed. One is to permit the accused to testify by a narrative without guidance through the lawyer's questioning. This compromises both contending principles; it exempts the lawyer from the duty to disclose false evidence but subjects the client to an implicit disclosure of information imparted to counsel. Another suggested resolution is that the advocate be entirely excused from the duty to reveal perjury if the perjury is that of the client. This solution, however, makes the advocate a knowing instrument of perjury.

12. The other resolution of the dilemma, and the one this Rule adopts, is that the lawyer must take reasonable remedial measure which may include revealing the client's perjury. A criminal accused has a right to the assistance of an advocate, a right to testify and a right of confidential communication with counsel. However, an accused should not have a right to assistance of counsel in committing perjury. Furthermore, an advocate has an obligation, not only in professional ethics but under the law as well, to avoid implication in the commission of perjury or other falsification of evidence.

False Evidence Not Introduced by the Lawyer

13. A lawyer may have introduced the testimony of a client or other witness who testified truthfully under direct examination but who offered false testimony or other evidence during examination by another party. Although the lawyer should urge that the false evidence be corrected or withdrawn, the full range of obligation imposed by paragraphs (a)(5) and (b) of this Rule do not apply to such situations. A subsequent use of that false testimony or other evidence by the lawyer in support of the client's case, however, would violate paragraph (a)(5).

Duration of Obligation

14. The time limit on the obligation to rectify the presentation of false testimony or other evidence varies from case to case but continues as long as there is a reasonable possibility of taking corrective legal actions before a tribunal.

Refusing to Offer Proof Believed to be False

15. A lawyer may refuse to offer evidence that the lawyer reasonably believes is untrustworthy, even if the lawyer does not know that the evidence is false. That discretion should be exercised cautiously, however, in order not to impair the legitimate interests of the client. Where a client wishes to have such suspect evidence introduced, generally the lawyer should do so and allow the finder of fact to assess its probative value. A lawyer's obligations under paragraphs (a)(2), (a)(5) and (b) of this Rule are not triggered by the introduction of testimony or other evidence that is believed by the lawyer to be false, but not known to be so.


Rule 1.9
Conflict of Interest: Former Client

A lawyer who has formerly represented a client in a matter shall not thereafter represent another person in the same or a substantially related matter in which that person's interests are materially adverse to the interests of the former client unless the former client consents after consultation.

    (b) A lawyer shall not knowingly represent a person in the same or a substantially related matter in which a firm with which the lawyer formerly was associated had previously represented a client.

      (1) whose interests are materially adverse to that per- son; and

      (2) about whom the lawyer had acquired information protected by Rules 1.6 and 1.9 that is material to the matter; unless the former client consents after consultation.

    (c) A lawyer who has formerly represented a client in a matter or whose present or former firm has formerly represented a client in a matter shall not thereafter:

      (1) use information relating to the representation to the disadvantage of the former client except as Rule 1.6 or Rule 3.3 would permit or require with respect to a client, or when the information has become generally known; or

      (2) reveal information relating to the representation except as Rule 1.6 or Rule 3.3 would permit or require with respect to a client.

OVERVIEW

Rule 1.9 concerns loyalty to the client in cases of serial representation; its protections are for the benefit of former clients. It is therefore less stringent than Rule l.7, which concerns the considerably more 289.

Breaux Brothers Construction Company
v.
Associated  Contractors, Inc.

No. 41474
Supreme Court of Lousiana
Dec. 13, 1954

Where parties to alleged oral contact intended from beginning to reduce their negotiations to a written contract, consent was suspended until such time as contract should be reduced to writing, and signed by all parties, and in absence of such reduction to writing, contact was unenforceable, even if all terms had been verbally agreed upon.

As far back as the year 1818 this court held that, where it has been agreed between the parties that an agreement shall be reduced to writing, the contract is not complete until it is written and signed by all the parties. Villere v. Brognier, 3 Mart, O.S., 326

Burk BAKER
v.
MACLAY PROPERTIES COMPANY.

No. 94-CA-1529
Supreme Court of Louisiana
Jan. 17, 1995
 

Persons may not by their juridical acts derogate from laws enacted for protection of public interest, and any act in derogation of such laws is absolute nullity. LSA-C.C. art 7

When parties intend to reduce their negotiations to written contract, neither party is bound until contract is reduced to writing and signed by both parties.

Absolutely null contact is deemed never to have existed. LSA-C.C. art. 2033

Home

CHILDREN STARVED DENIAL OF DUE PROCESS PEOPLE ROBBERY

Citizens Against Legal Abuse
P.O. Box 51386
New Orleans, LA 70151-1386
(504) 821-9580
E-Mail:abuse@ca-la.org
http://www.ca-la.org
Copyrightę 1998, 1999
 Citizens Against  Legal Abuse, Inc.

nav
CLEINT ATTORNEY DESTROYED

The contents of this site, signatures, and copies of cases are on file. Please
contact us for proof.