Thursday, August 27, 2026
Page 3
C.A. Justices Unimpressed That Pro Per’s Ancestor Was Member of California Supreme Court
By a MetNews Staff Writer
A pro per litigant, who says he went to law school, has failed to sway justices of the Court of Appeal for this district by boasting that his great uncle, a century ago, was a member of the California Supreme Court and opining that his ancestor would have found appalling the conduct of the judge who sustained a demurrer, without leave to amend, to the appellant’s complaint.
Presiding Justice Maria E. Stratton of Div. Eight authored Tuesday’s unpublished opinion affirming a judgment of dismissal of Frank Cockrell’s action against Victor Martinez & Associates Inc. and others over the management of a senior-citizen mobile-home park. In his brief on appeal, Cockrell sought to tie the sustaining of a demurrer to bias on the part of Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Stephen T. Morgan.
Pointing to his ancestry, he wrote:
“99 years ago my great uncle Ira Francis Thompson was appointed to the Second Appellate District after being the Presiding Judge in the Los Angeles Superior and later was appointed to the California Supreme Court as an Associate. He also taught ethics to law students. I personally never met him because he died very young but he lived on through my grandfather, great uncles and my mother. The reason I mentioned him is because I was raised in a household that loved our U.S. Constitution.”
Thomson died on Aug, 4, 1937. Although he had been a member of the Los Angeles Superior Court from Sept. 1, 1923 to Oct. 4, 1926, it does not appear that he was a presiding judge of the court.
Find Conduct ‘Offensive’
The appellant continued:
“I went to law school & worked in the Senate as the chief consultant the committee on elections & reapportionment. I took Latin & typing in high school because I wanted to become a lawyer….So, when I get a biased Judge, I find it offensive….”
Cockrell commented that his great uncle “would find the conduct of Judge Morgan unethical & prejudicial.”
Conduct on the part of Morgan to which he takes exception included dismissing as Cockrell’s co-plaintiffs persons he determined were being, in essence, represented by Cockrell, who says he attended McGeorge School of Law in Sacramento, but is not a member of the State Bar.
Defective Brief
Stratton declared:
“The stream-of-consciousness nature of Cockrell’s brief, coupled with the absence of argument headings and reasoned analysis, renders it very difficult to discern what precise errors he is claiming and how any such errors were prejudicial. His self-represented status may explain the deficiencies in his brief but does not excuse them.”
She added:
“Because we are unable to discern any of his arguments due to his failure to provide a cogent statement of facts or cite to legal authority, we deem his arguments waived.”
The case is Cockrell v. Victor Martinez & Associates, B342090.
Copyright 2026, Metropolitan News Company