Mary
Neal
Via Facsimile
Via U.S.
Mail
Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals
United States District Court
312
North Spring Street
Los Angeles, CA 90012
Re: Amicus Letter in re:
THE COCHRAN FIRM, P.C., an Alabama
corporation, Plaintiff-counter-defendant - Appellee, v. THE COCHRAN FIRM LOS
ANGELES, LLP, a California Limited Liability Partnership, Defendant, and RANDY
H. MCMURRAY, P.C., a California professional corporation; RANDY H. MCMURRAY,
individually, Defendants-counter-claimants - Appellants. No. 13-55502 D.C. No.
2:12-cv-05868-SJOMRW
Dear Honorable Judges:
I. The Cochran Firm
has filed an appeal of the Order issued by United States District Court,
Central District of California (“ CA USDC”). USDC ruled on May12, 2015, that
neither The Cochran Firm nor any of its district offices meet the criterion to
be called “a law firm.” The Cochran Firm is a court-declared fraud. The
paragraphs in this letter are numbered because of hackers having stolen parts
of articles written on this matter numerous times in the past. This letter has
thirty-one(31) numbered paragraphs.
II. The Cochran Firm
came before this honorable court to appeal CA USDC’s Order, although The
Cochran Firm offices put forward that exact defense in other courts to avoid
liability after breaching the Code of Professional Responsibility. Various
Cochran Firm offices and the so-called headquarters office in Alabama ordinarily disclaim association with
each other, especially when former clients sue or threaten to sue for fraud,
malpractice, breach of contract, and racism. The Cochran Firm is “a single law
firm” nowhere except in its false advertising and press releases. The partners
misuse Johnnie Cochran’s name to attract consumers who contract with The
Cochran Firm frauds for legal services, but what many of the clients actually
get is a case of Legal Abuse Syndrome.
III. Please accept
this as my amicus letter regarding The Cochran Firm’s appeal of USDC’s righteous
Order. Many former clients and attorneys of The Cochran Firm have levied
allegations of racism, fraud, and deliberate malpractice against the firm, and
their continuing operation as “a national law firm” is a threat to justice for
many other legal consumers, particularly African Americans. I am a former and
future plaintiff against The Cochran Firm partners, who defrauded my elderly
mother and myself to rescue police and others who were to be our defendants in
a wrongful death and two negligence civil actions regarding my mentally,
physically disabled brother, Larry Neal. The advertised Cochran Firm office in Memphis, Tennessee contracted
with my mother in an undisclosed conflict of interest, then proceeded to
withhold legal services while the Tennessee
statute of limitations passed.
IV. This letter
has five(5) sections after the initial three numbered paragraphs:
1. Hattie and
Mary Neal vs. The Cochran Firm
2. Judy Nashville’s
Allegations Against The Cochran Firm
3. Christopher Tucker
vs. The Cochran Firm
4. Summary
5. Nine(9) Links to Verifying
Testimony and Documentation
V. Whereas the cases discussed
herein entail The Cochran Firm’s identity crisis, which is the subject of the
legal action before this honorable Court, the list of defrauded former clients
of The Cochran Firm is actually much longer. See a partial list of parties with
whom I have had contact about The Cochran Firm’s frauds against them, including
some who filed lawsuits against the frauds, at an online article at link 9 to this letter, which is called, “Beware
of Treacherous Lawyers: The Cochran Firm.”
VI. HATTIE NEAL and
MARY NEAL vs. THE COCHRAN FIRM – Plaintiffs’ initial contact with The Cochran
Firm was with the law office in Atlanta, which identifies itself (when it suits
the firm to do so) as being The Cochran Firm’s Atlanta office. Other times, it
called itself Cochran Cherry Givens Smith & Sistrunk, PC, CCGSS, P.C. or
CCGSS, LLC. This office made an appointment for our contract-signing in the advertised
Cochran Firm’s Memphis
office the day following Larry’s funeral. We did not have long-distance phone
service in 2003, so the Atlanta
office made all arrangements for us. The Atlanta
office assured us that the Atlanta office and Memphis office of The
Cochran Firm would work together to bring justice on our behalf and that they
had the entire resources of The Cochran Firm at their disposal.
VII. Lawyers and
staff in both the Atlanta and the Memphis office indicated
to us that they would work in unison to bring justice regarding the secret
arrest and wrongful death of Larry Neal before signing contract. The Neals were
falsely led to believe (through U.S. Mail fraud) that The Cochran Firm was
pursuing a vigorous investigation and preparing three civil action lawsuits
related to Larry Neal’s secret arrest and wrongful death: Shelby County Jail in
Memphis for wrongful death, the State of Tennessee for negligence, and another
negligence action against Larry’s final care home. In fact, we expressly assured
that during “periods of silence” by the firm, the firm was diligently working
on the cases.
VIII. As one who has
a lengthy background working in the legal field, I had no clue that a concern presenting
itself nationally and internationally as being a professional corporation or
limited liability corporation would or could go to court and disclaim any
association with other offices that are also presented to the public as being
within that same corporation. When we sued The Cochran Firm for fraud and
malpractice, that is exactly what happened regarding “Hattie Neal and Mary Neal
vs. The Cochan Firm,” Ga.
Sup. Ct., CA
File 2005CV104215 (2005).
IX. The Atlanta office answered
the Neals’ lawsuit and claimed that our lawsuit was wrongly served to that law
office. It claimed that CCGSS was in no way related to The Cochran Firm
headquarters in Alabama or to the Memphis office of The
Cochran Firm. In fact, CCGSS claimed being wholly owned and operated in Georgia. The
farce continued when the Neals sued again in 2007 for malpractice and fraud in
United States District Court, Northern District of Georgia, under the diversity
rule. The diversity rule requires that plaintiffs and defendants have different
state residences. Furthermore, examination of Secretary of States’ records
later disclosed that CCGSS was actually not wholly owned and operated in the
State of Georgia.
In fact, the law office was not registered in Georgia at all under that name.
Neither was it listed as a company “doing business as.” CCGSS was registered by
the Tennessee Secretary of State’s office using the same address as the Memphis
Cochran Firm office, which CCGSS disclaimed being affiliated with before the
court. That was a fraud on the courts in Georgia.
X. Legal Abuse
Syndrome has very negative effects on one’s physical health and emotional state.
It was so surprising and disappointing when Judge Wendy Shoob dismissed the
Neals’ righteous lawsuit based on CCGSS’s perjury that I became physically ill.
Every morning I used MARTA to ride to work where I helped other people get
justice, and I was forced to watch commercials for The Cochran Firm’s Atlanta office on the
MARTA train en route. The commercials began with a huge photo of Johnnie
Cochran smiling. It was superimposed over a video of The Atlanta Cochran Firm’s
lawyers and staff sitting around a conference table. Johnnie Cochran’s photo
would slowly fade and leave those frauds at the table issuing promises that
although Cochran had died, his vision and dedication to deliver superb legal
services to “the common man” remained the objective of The Cochran Firm.
Millions of commuters were subjected to those lies every six to ten minutes on
MARTA, and my blood pressure rose to 200 over 110. I had to quit working for a
period of time.
XI. The MARTA train
passed billboards as big as houses advertising The Cochran Firm’s Atlanta office operating
at the same address where the court had ruled my lawsuit was “wrongly served.” The
Cochran Firm’s Atlanta
office’s advertising sponsored college games on television and ran commercials
on other TV shows. It had full-page ads in phone books, and Atlanta was listed first on The Cochran
Firm’s alphabetical list of its offices on its website. The Cochran Firm’s Atlanta office advertises
heavily in legal journals and periodicals, which were abundant in the law offices
where I worked, and was given awards for “outstanding legal services.” That is
why I stopped working, stopped taking newspapers, and stopped watching television.
After MARTA removed the ads, which CCGSS itself had labeled false in Georgia
Superior Court, I was able to resume working, although my Legal Abuse Syndrome
remains.
XII. After my mother
and I sued The Cochran Firm frauds in United States District Court, Northern
District of Georgia in 2007 (Judge Timothy Batten presiding) (“GA USDC”), we
experienced surveillance: being followed in-person and online, telephone
takeovers, police harassment, and computer hacking. None of these offenses were
investigated by law enforcement although I have ample proof of all allegations
and filed police reports, complaints with the U.S. Department of Justice, and
notified GA USDC about the violations of U.S. Code 242. Judge Batten also dismissed our righteous
lawsuit, saying that The Cochran Firm’s fraud against the Neals was
“immaterial.” It was ruled immaterial that The Cochran Firm contracted with the
Neals without revealing that its managing partner in the Memphis
office, where the Neals signed contract, was himself a Shelby County
commissioner. The Shelby County Commission owns and operates the jail where
Larry Neal died. Judge Batten ruled immaterial that The Cochran Firm lied in
its status report to the Neals about civil action cases which were secretly
nonexistent while the statute of limitations passed. Judge Batten ruled it
immaterial that a family had been defrauded of the opportunity to file wrongful
death and negligence lawsuits timely due to fraud, breach of contract and
deliberate legal malpractice by The Cochran Firm.
XIII. I was surprised
that GA USDC accepted the case filed under the diversity rule with The Cochran
Firm’s Atlanta
office clearly visible from the courthouse’s upper level windows and its
lawyers representing other clients in GA USDC. I began to believe courts were
under orders by Washington
to allow frauds by The Cochran Firm against African American legal consumers
after deaths and catastrophic injuries caused by police officers and big
businesses. I believe media companies are under orders not to report that The
Cochran Firm disclaims being “a single law firm” when it gets sued by former
clients who the firm defrauded and to censor negative news about The Cochran
Firm, such as the fact that CA USDC ruled that it is “not a law firm.” It is
interesting that in Tennessee’s
2007 records, “The Cochran Firm” was also registered at the Secretary of
State’s office as being a pseudo name. These facts and the gross negligence of
courts and state bars to hold The Cochran Firm responsible to the Rules of
Professional Conduct led me to believe that The Cochran Firm is a modern
CoIntelPro operation against African Americans. The U.S. Government refuses to
release documents about the 18 days of secret arrest and wrongful death of
Larry Neal, which is the case that The Cochran Firm kept out of court by its
fraud and subterfuge. The United States Department of Justice answered a
Freedom of Information Act request I filed about Neal’s death by saying records
were not released because his arrest and death are “matters of national
security.”
XIV. Because it
seemed likely that The Cochran Firm had defrauded other African Americans, and
I set out to find them despite continuous destruction of my computer equipment,
intimidation by police, and telephone takeovers. The number of lawsuits and
complaints I found over the years levied by similarly defrauded former clients
and former lawyers of The Cochran Firm was staggering, and I doubt if my list
is complete. Continuous attacks against my free speech and freedom of press
impede communication with persons who try to contact me by phone or email or
during my radio broadcasts. See plenty of examples in “Justice Gagged,” a
Blogger blog, and conduct a Google search for “Mary Neal Cochran Firm Fraud.”
XV. Both of my
lawsuits against The Cochran Firm were pro se. It is challenging to find
lawyers who will represent clients in lawsuits against The Cochran Firm. I
interviewed with many lawyers, some of whom could not take the case because to
do so would constitute conflicts of interest. Johnnie Cochran’s name is/was
such a draw for black legal consumers that The Cochran Firm subcontracts some
of its cases to other law firms. One lawyer was completely exasperated when he
investigated The Cochran Firm’s fraud against my family, but he declined the
case, also. He said that The Cochran Firm was obviously “too well-connected to
fall” if it could get judges to disclaim its existence while lawyers from that
firm presents other cases before those very courts, and if state bar
associations and consumer protection agencies refused to stop the fraud, and if
media companies refused to report lawsuits against the firm. He told me that when
he discussed the prospect of representing me with his partners, they declined,
believing that exposing the apparent collusion to deny the Neals’ due process
of law rights would harm the lawyers’ chances of ever running for political
offices or securing judgeships.
XVI. Most the
allegations and lawsuits against The Cochran Firm that I found did not address The
Cochran Firm’s identity confusion, but some had that element. See summaries
below for two more such cases: “Judy Nashville vs. St.
Louis” and “Christopher Tucker vs. The Cochran Firm.” The information about
these cases was relayed to me by the former clients who complained. Their oral
testimony is also below under “Nine Links to Verifying Online Testimony and
Documentation.”
XVII. JUDY
NASHVILLE’S ALLEGATIONS AGAINST THE COCHRAN FIRM Judy Nashville was the mother of Stanley
Parker, 17, a St. Louis youth who walking home with his brother and friends
when they were accosted and shot at by a police officer. Stanley was killed. The police officer was
not driving a police vehicle and never identified himself as being with law
enforcement. The car drove toward the boys so fast that they feared it was
driven by gang members and ran into an alley. The policeman exited his car and
hid behind a dumpster until the boys emerged, then opened fire. He fired nine
bullets, and fatally shot Stanley
in his back.
XVIII. Nashville
initially hired another lawyer to handle her son’s wrongful death case, but
that attorney started experiencing intimidation after filing Nashville’s lawsuit. When the attorney’s
office was burglarized, Nashville's initial attorney lost his nerve and withdrew from representing Stanley
Parker’s wrongful death case. Next, Nashville
hired The Cochran Firm, and Rodney Holmes, Esq. represented her. Holmes never
took depositions or subpoenaed witnesses to prepare for trial in this death-by-police case. On the trial
date, Holmes was a no-show. He later told Nashville
that he had inadequate money to continue her representation. Holmes said that
his was just a small law office and that he had mortgaged his home to keep it operational,
which caused tension with his wife. He indicated that being a Cochran Firm
office was purely for advertising purposes. Nashville had Legal Abuse Syndrome by that
time, and she did nothing about having been defrauded by The Cochran Firm and
Holmes; however, she plans to join other former clients in a RICO Act
Racketeering lawsuit.
XIX. Nashville and
the Neals believed The Cochran Firm was one law firm with different offices throughout
the country just as the firm presents, but Holmes said that perception was
purely for advertising purposes. Each office of The Cochran Firm actually operates separately
except for using the name “The Cochran Firm,” and Holmes’ claimed his small law
office was undergoing too much financial distress to continue representing Nashville. Ironically,
Holmes did not reveal any of this until he failed to appear on Nashville's court date
in Stanley Parker’s wrongful death case, which benefited police.
XX. CHRISTOPHER
TUCKER vs. THE COCHRAN FIRM – Christopher Tucker’s vehicle was stopped by
Oklahoma City Police officers one night, and he brutally beaten and Tasered
repeatedly by police officers. As often happens in police brutality incidents,
Tucker was charged with resisting arrest and incarcerated. Tucker said that
although he had no warrants and no reason to be arrested, he fully complied
with police instructions and lay on the ground but was continually punched,
kicked, and Tasered. Tucker works as an armed security agent and had a clean
criminal background before his arrest.
XXI. Tucker
contracted with The Cochran Firm to represent him against the resisting arrest
charge. Tucker believed police had charged him to excuse their own misconduct. Tucker
paid The Cochran Firm over $12,000 to represent him, believing he was
contracting with a highly effective law firm. Tucker realized that exoneration
regarding his criminal charge was important to winning his personal injury lawsuit
against Oklahoma City Police Department regarding his complaint about police
brutality.
XXII. The intake
interview, contract signing, etc., between Tucker and The Cochran Firm resulted
through telephone calls, emails, and facsimile transmissions. Tucker’s Cochran
Firm attorney flew into Oklahoma City
on Tucker’s day in court and seemed inebriated to Tucker and his sister. The
lawyer carried no briefcase or folder and had none of the documents about
Tucker’s case which Tucker had submitted to The Cochran Firm. Tucker and the
lawyer were met in court by a local attorney who The Cochran Firm had paid $500.
The local lawyer was then informed by The Cochran Firm lawyer that he would
represent Tucker. This switch happened because The Cochran Firm lawyer was not
actually licensed to practice law in Oklahoma.
The local lawyer had zero time to prepare for court. Tucker was found guilty
and feels he had ineffectual counsel.
XXIII. Tucker’s
reputation and physical health were compromised in his violent police
encounter. He now has a criminal record, which negatively impacts his potential
for advancement on his job. He had operations after the police incident, and
doctors plan another operation on his shoulder. His back is in continuous pain,
and it sometimes has muscular spasms. Yet Tucker lost his case against police
because The Cochran Firm seemed determined to cause him to lose his criminal
case and benefit police.
XXIV. Tucker sued The
Cochran Firm for malpractice, and the case is in litigation now. The Cochran Firm tried to have the case moved
to California, but jurisdiction is proper in Oklahoma. Tucker
discovered that although The Cochran Firm is advertised in Oklahoma
City, there was apparently no law office for the firm within Oklahoma and The Cochran
Firm had no lawyers registered with the court where Tucker’s case was tried. This
is another example of The Cochran Firm harming legal consumers by falsely
advertising itself as a “national law firm.”
XXV. SUMMARY – CA USDC
rightly issued an order on May 12, 2015, affirming that neither The Cochran
Firm nor any of its district offices does meet the criterion to be called “a
law firm.” As demonstrated in the “Neals v. The Cochran Firm” in Georgia
Superior Court and “Neals v. Cochran Cherry Givens Smith” in federal court, The
Cochran firm itself denies being a single law firm when challenged or sued by
defrauded clients. CCGSS denied sharing the same insurance company, computer
system, or anything else with other Cochran Firm offices. The Memphis office of The Cochran Firm also
disclaimed being a Cochran Firm office. Yet, when Judge Timothy Batten
determined that The Cochran Firm’s Memphis
office owed the Neals reimbursement for the service of process fee, the check
was drawn on a Memphis bank account belonging to The Cochran Firm. The Cochran
Firm is so comfortable committing perjury in Georgia courts that Hezekiah
Sistrunk, Esq. also advised his client, Sarah Dozier, to lie to Fulton County
Probate Court, which caused her to be sued.
XXVI.
Misrepresentations by The Cochran Firm About Identity and Scope of Services
(a) In
Georgia Superior Court, CCGSS claimed to be wholly owned and operated in the
State of Georgia, but the
Secretary of State’s office in Georgia
had no such firm registered; Tennessee
did. Other law offices that are held out to the public as being The Cochran
Firm are also likely to omit proper registration with Secretaries of States’
offices. It is interesting that courts do not check.
(b) Some
of the attorneys working out of law offices that are advertised to the public
as being The Cochran Firm may not be registered to appear before courts where
they contract with clients to present legal cases. A Cochran Firm lawyer had no
standing to represent his client, Christopher Tucker, before the court where the
case was tried.
(c) Many
clients, like Judy Nashville, believe they are being represented by a big law
firm when they contract with The Cochran Firm and learn too late that they are
represented by small operations that are barely solvent.
XXVII. As a defrauded
client, Mary Neal is very pleased that CA USDC has ended The Cochran Firm’s frauds against legal
consumers. This could save many people, unless the Ninth Circuit Court revives this beast. These unethical lawyers regularly work behind their
clients’ backs. The Cochran Firm offices then hide behind
fake and/or confusing identities to avoid accountability. I request the Ninth
Circuit Court of Appeals to reject resurrecting this monster. Furthermore, I
request for this Honorable Court to order The Cochran Firm to dispense with all
of its advertising under Johnnie Cochran's name (which tricks minorities) and cease presenting itself as a “nationwide
law firm.” This Court should also order that state bars must stop recommending
The Cochran Firm to legal consumers who call to inquire about lawyers to handle
their cases. The Ninth Circuit Court should investigate the law licenses of
every attorney practicing at Cochran Firm offices to determine if they are in
good standing. Some of The Cochran Firm lawyers might not be licensed attorneys.
Several lawyers in cases that came to my attention have been disbarred.
XXVIII. It is particularly
alarming that The Cochran Firm even advertises itself as criminal lawyers and death penalty attorneys.
The Cochran Firm’s defrauded clients continue to lose money in corrupt civil
action cases, and that unfortunate. However, incompetent, unethical lawyers like
those at The Cochran Firm can cause criminal defendants to be imprisoned for
years or killed by execution, which would be an irreversible tragedy.
XXIX. NINE(9) LINKS TO VERIFYING TESTIMONY AND DOCUMENTATION
1) Cochran Cherry Givens Smith & Sistrunk, PC’s
Responses to Plaintiffs’ First Continuing Interrogatories (denying any
affiliation with other Cochran Firm offices)
2) Georgia
Secretary of State’s Search Results
This is an audio
file from a radio broadcast that was attacked by hackers, especially in the
beginning part of the interview. Judy Nashville was my guest, discussing lawyer
fraud.
6) Media report about Stanley Parker, son of
Judy Nashville: “Shot in the Back”
This is an audio file which
recorded one of my interviews with Christopher Tucker.
8) Christopher Tucker vs. The Cochran Firm
Frauds
This online article lists most of The Cochran Firm frauds
that I know about currently.
XXX. When my book,
“The Cochran Firm Fraud,” is published, more frauds will come to light. For
example, Judy Nashville indicated that according to her defendants’ attorney, Holmes
regularly abandoned clients on their court dates. One Cochran Firm client in Georgia alleged being sexually compromised (seduced) by
her Cochran Firm lawyer, M. Pete, Esq., and McMurray, a former partner, alleges that female
employees in Los Angeles
were also sexually exploited by the firm. More former clients who were sexually
compromised and/or deprived of due process of law by The Cochran Firm are
expected to also come forward. Lawyers at The Cochran Firm act as though the
Dred Scott Decision is law and bring embarrassment their profession. The CA
USDC Order which stated The Cochran Firm is not “a law firm” is well founded.
Such racketeering as clients of The Cochran Firm undergo, targeting African
Americans with particularity, must be exposed and opposed.
XXXI. Thank you for
your kind attention to this amicus letter. If this Honorable Court should have
questions, please try to contact me by using the contact information in the letter’s
header. There is much more information available, but the scope of this letter was purposely shortened to make it possible to read it in a single sitting. My phone calls and emails are compromised, because the 18 days
of secret arrest and murder of Larry Neal - a mentally, physically disabled black man and U.S. citizen - are still national secrets. Perhaps U.S. Mail might reach me, although I cannot guarantee that.
Sincerely yours,
/s/
Mary Lane Neal
/mln
