THE TRUTH

Text Box: Pro Se Plaintiff, Candice Lue’s Opposition/Response to the LIES in Defendant Alex Khavin’s “Declaration”

THE TRUTH

In the case of Lue v. JPMorgan Chase & Co. et al (U.S. Supreme Court: Case # 19-260)

Pro Se Plaintiff, Candice Lue’s Opposition/Response to the LIES in Defendant Fidelia Shillingford’s “Declaration”

Pro Se Plaintiff, Candice Lue’s Opposition/Response to the LIES in Defendant Chris Liasis’ “Declaration”

Pro Se Plaintiff, Candice Lue’s Opposition/Response to the LIES in Defendant Michelle Sullivan’s “Declaration”

Pro Se Plaintiff, Candice Lue’s Opposition/Response to the Main Aider and Abettor, Defendant Helen DuBowy’s “Declaration”

Pro Se Plaintiff, Candice Lue’s Opposition/Response to the LIES in Declarant Kimberly Dauber’s “Declaration”

Pro Se Plaintiff, Candice Lue’s Opposition/Response to “Investigator”, Defendant John Vega’s “Declaration”

Pro Se Plaintiff, Candice Lue’s Opposition/Response to the LIES in Declarant Baruch Horowitz’s “Declaration”

PENALTY OF PERJURY - 18 U.S.C. § 1621

Whoever in any DECLARATION, certificate, verification, or statement under penalty of perjury as permitted under section 1746 of title 28, United States Code, willfully subscribes as true any material matter which he does not believe to be true; is guilty of perjury and shall, except as otherwise expressly provided by law, be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

Text Box: Pro Se Plaintiff, Candice Lue’s Response/Opposition to the LIES in the Defendants’ Statement of Undisputed Material Facts

PART 1

Pro Se Plaintiff, Candice Lue’s Opposition to the LIES in the Defendants’ Memorandum of Law in Support of Their Summary Judgment

Defendants Declarations aka LIES under Penalty of Perjury | THE TRUTH | THE EVIDENCE | SHOP CandiceLue®

CLICK HERE TO SEE THE RESPECTIVE EVIDENCE

PART 2

Pro Se Plaintiff, Candice Lue’s Opposition to the LIES in the Defendants’ Memorandum of Law in Support of Their Summary Judgment

PART 3

Pro Se Plaintiff, Candice Lue’s Opposition to the LIES in the Defendants’ Memorandum of Law in Support of Their Summary Judgment

Harriet Tubman, Rosa Parks, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Nelson Mandela, Bob Marley, Marcus Garvey and so many others “paid it forward” for me. Hopefully, I will be able to “pay it forward” for others.

Lue v. JPMorgan Chase & Co. et al (1:16-CV-03207)

THE CLEAN HANDS DOCTRINE

The clean hands doctrine is a rule of law that someone bringing a lawsuit or motion and asking the court for equitable relief must be INNOCENT of wrongdoing or unfair conduct relating to the subject matter of his/her claim.”

In other words, JPMorgan Chase & Co., et al bringing a motion and asking the Court for equitable relief must be INNOCENT of wrongdoing, THE CRIMES OF PERJURY AND OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE.