Monday, March 9, 2026
Page 8
|
|
David Walgren
Los Angeles Superior Court Office No. 81
|
L |
os Angeles Superior Court Judge David Walgren has been challenged for reelection by an unaccomplished lawyer who has no law office and likes to run for posts, as he often has, that he can’t possibly win. In endorsing Walgren in few words, we do not mean to imply that the incumbent is undeserving of praise—he is a well-regarded jurist; there is simply no arguable merit to the challenge and it should not be dignified by a lengthy discussion.
Dan Kapelovitz alleges that Walgren is biased in favor of the prosecution. If that were so, he would be papered—disqualified via Code of Civil Procedure §70.6 declarations—by the Public Defender’s Office, and he isn’t. Surely there would be Court of Appeal opinions reversing him, reflecting such bias; Kapelovitz points to none.
He does make note of a case in which Walgren hiked the bail following a preliminary hearing. Judges have that prerogative. There are instances where they would be remiss if they did not take that action based on the evidence adduced at the hearing.
Kapelovitz will not win the election. However, Walgren will be a loser in a sense; despite the existence of a judges’ political action committee, the judge will no doubt spend personal funds on his campaign and will be deprived of peace of mind until the ballots are counted. The challenge is unconscionable.
Copyright 2026, Metropolitan News Company