Case Information: 07-BG-0131 | |||
Short Caption: | IN RE: FRANK FEIGENBAUM | Classification: | Bar Governance - Bar - Disciplinary Reciprocal |
Superior Court or Agency Case Number: | BDN458-06 | Filed Date: | 03/07/2007 |
| |||
Opening Event Date: | 03/07/2007 | Case Status: | Closed |
Record Completed: | Post-Decision Matter Pending: | ||
Briefs Completed: | 01/31/2008 | ||
Argued/Submitted: | 06/12/2008 | ||
Disposition: | Next Scheduled Action: | ||
Mandate Issued: |
Party Information | |||||||||
Appellate Role | Party Name | IFP | Attorney(s) | Arguing Attorney | E-Filer | ||||
Petitioner | Bar Counsel | N |
| ||||||
Petitioner | Board on Professional Responsibility | N |
| ||||||
Respondent | Frank Feigenbaum | N | Pro Se | N |
Events | ||||
Event Date | Status | Description | Result | |
03/07/2007 | DISCIPLINARY LETTER from the Office of Bar Counsel with certified copies of two orders of the Supreme Court of the State of California suspending and accepting the disciplinary resignation of respondent, who is currently an active member in good standing of the District of Columbia Bar. | |||
04/03/2007 | ORDER Having received certified copies of orders of the Supreme Court of the State of California suspending and accepting the disciplinary resignation of respondent, it is, accordingly, pursuant to D.C. Bar Rule XI, Sec 11 (d), ORDERED that respondent is suspended from the practice of law in the District of Columbia pending final disposition of this proceeding, effective on the date of entry of this order, and it is FURTHER ORDERED that Bar Counsel inform the Board on Professional Responsibility of its position regarding reciprocal discipline within 30 days of the date of this order. Thereafter, respondent shall show cause before the Board on Professional Responsibility, if cause there be, within 10 days why identical, greater or lesser discipline should not be imposed in the District of Columbia. It is FURTHER ORDERED that the Board on Professional Responsibility is directed to recommend promptly thereafter to this Court whether identical, greater or lesser discipline should be imposed as reciprocal discipline or whether the Board, instead, elects to proceed de novo pursuant to D.C. Bar Rule XI, Sec 11. It is FURTHER ORDERED that respondent's attention is drawn to the requirement of Rule XI, Sec 14 relating to suspended attorneys and to the provisions of Rule XI, Sec 16 (c) dealing with the timing of eligibility for reinstatement as related to compliance with Rule XI, Sec 14, including the filing of the required affidavit. It is FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk shall cause a copy of this order and the orders of the Supreme Court for the State of California, to be directed to the Chair of the Board on Professional Responsibility and transmitted to the respondent. It is FURTHER ORDERED that Bar Counsel advise the Court if the matter is concluded without the necessity of further court action. (ETW) | |||
12/21/2007 | REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD ON PROF. RESP. that as reciprocal discipline in this matter, the court enter an order suspending respondent from the practice of law in the District of Columbia for a period of five years, with a requirement that he demonstrate his fitness to resume the practice of law as a condition of his reinstatement. We further recommend that respondent's suspension be deemed, for purposes of reinstatement, to commence upon his full compliance with D.C. Bar R. XI, Sec 14 (g) | |||
01/10/2008 | LETTER from the Office of Bar Counsel taking no exception to the report and recommendation of the Board on Professional Responsibility. | |||
01/31/2008 | BRIEFS COMPLETED | |||
01/31/2008 | FINAL SCREENING - SUMMARY CALENDAR I | |||
04/29/2008 | CALENDAR NOTICE SENT | |||
06/12/2008 | Filed | ACTION - Argued / Submitted | ||
06/12/2008 | SUBMITTED to Judges Glickman, Kramer, Fisher | |||
06/26/2008 | SUSPENSION ORDERED that Franklin Feigenbaum is hereby suspended from the practice of law in the District of Columbia for a period of five years. Reinstatement is conditioned on proof of fitness to practice law. We direct respondent's attention to the requirements of D.C. Bar R. XI, Sec 14 (g) and their effect on his eligibility for reinstatement. See D.C. Bar R. XI, Sec 16 (c). (GL, KR, FI) |