Legal Opinion

John Doe and Richard H. Foster v. The State Bar of California, Michael E. Wald and David L. Frey, Jr.

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided September 18, 1978No. 76-2894PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Per curiam

This appeal is from the judgment of the district court dismissing this action to en join disciplinary proceedings of the State Bar of California against appellant John Doe. Appellants contend that the disciplinary proceedings violate the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

After a careful review of the record and the briefs of counsel, it is our opinion that the trial judge correctly concluded that the federal courts do not have jurisdiction to interfere with disciplinary proceedings of the State Bar of California for the reasons stated in his opinion. Doe v. State Bar of…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Neil S. MacKay v. The Honorable Buell A. Nesbett and the Honorable John H. DimondCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1969
  2. Doe v. State Bar of CaliforniaDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1976

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Whistleblower 14106-10W v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 2011
  2. Rosenthal v. Justices of the Supreme Court of CaliforniaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1990
  3. Garden State Bar Ass'n v. Middlesex County Ethics CommitteeCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1981
  4. Garden State Bar Association v. Middlesex County Ethics CommitteeCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1981
  5. Rosenthal v. Justices Of The Supreme Court Of CaliforniaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1990

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API