| Events |
| Event Date | Status | Description | Result |
| 02/14/1996 | | DISCIPLINARY LETTER from the Office of Bar Counsel with a recommendation that the Court treat Mr. Ezrin's letter as a motion for rein- statement and, as such, that the motion be denied,without orejudice to Mr. Ezrin's institution of a reinstatement proceeding before the Board in accordance with Rule XI and the rules prescribed by the Board. | |
| 04/03/1996 | | ORDER On consideration of the letter from respondent requesting to be reinstated as an active member of the District of Columbia Bar, and Bar Counsel's opposition thereto, it is ORDERED that respondent's request to be reinstated to the District of Columbia Bar is denied without prejudice to the filing of a petition for reinstatement. (By ST, RZ, KN) | |
| 04/10/1996 | | RESP MO TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE PET FOR REHEARING to May 7, 1996 (no oppo). | |
| 05/07/1996 | | RECEIVED respondent's petition for rehearing rehearing en banc. (see pending motion) | |
| 05/20/1996 | | RECEIVED opposition of Bar Counsel to petition for rehearing and suggestion for rehearing en banc. | |
| 05/20/1996 | | PETITIONER'S MISCELLANEOUS PROCEDURAL MOTION (Bar Counsel) for leave to file opposition to petition for rehearing and rehearing en banc. | |
| 05/20/1996 | | PETITIONER'S MISCELLANEOUS PROCEDURAL MOTION for leave to file opposition to petition for rehearing and suggestion for rehearing en banc. | |
| 05/20/1996 | | RECEIVED Bar Counsel's opposition | |
| 08/07/1996 | | LETTER from the Office of Bar Counsel re: respondent's counsel's objections to petitioner's opposition to respondent's petition for rehearing or rehearing en banc. | |
| 08/20/1996 | | RECEIVED respondent's opposition to the motion of Bar Counsel for leave to file an answer to his petition for rehearing. | |
| 03/19/1997 | | ORDER On consideration of respondent's petition for rehearing of the court's order of April 3, 1996, based upon the opinion of a panel of this court in In re: Abrams, 662 A.2d 867 (D.C. 19950, and it appearing that the opinion was vacated and an opinion issued by this court en banc in In re: Abrams, No. 91-Bg-1518 (D.C. February 5, 1997), it is ORDERED that if respondent continues to seek review of this court's order of April 3, 1996, respondent shall, within 30 days from the date of this order, file a replacement petition addressing current controlling authority; otherwise said petition will be forthwith denied; and it is FURTHER ORDERED that if such a replacement petition should be filed, the petition shall also address 1) the fact that the disbarment in this jurisdiction was entered pursuant to then D.C. Bar R. XI, Sec 17 (Disbarment by consent); 2) the fact that the disbarment in Maryland apparently was not based upon the convictions per se but instead on the conduct of respondent and his violation of several Maryland disciplinary rules, which would make respondent subject to reciprocal discipline in any event; 3) the effect of a gubernatorial pardon upon a statutory enactment of the federal Congress. (By ST, RZ, KN) | |
| 04/15/1997 | | RESPONDENT'S MISCELLANEOUS PROCEDURAL MOTION for a two day extension of time to file the replacement petition requested in the Court's order dated 4/3/97, to April 22, 1997. (no oppo) | |
| 04/15/1997 | | MOTION(S) FEE PAID for mrmp | |
| 04/23/1997 | | RECEIVED respondent's replacement Petition for Rehearing and Suggestion for Rehearing En Banc. | |
| 04/28/1997 | | ORDER On consideration of respondent's motion for extension of time to file the lodged replacement petition for rehearing and suggestion for rehearing en banc, and there appearing to be no opposition thereto, it is ORDERED that respondent's motion is granted and the Clerk is directed to file the lodged replacement petition for rehearing and suggestion for rehearing en banc. (AMW) | |
| 04/28/1997 | | RESP'S PETITION FOR REHEARING/REHEARING EN BANC (Replacement) | |
| 04/30/1997 | | ORDER It appearing that respondent has filed a replacement petition, it is ORDERED that petitioner, within 20 days from the date of this order, shall file a response thereto. (By ST, RZ, KN) | |
| 05/14/1997 | | PETITIONER'S ANSWER/RESPONSE (Bar Counsel) to replacement petition. | |
| 06/03/1997 | | ORDER On consideration of petitioner's replacement petition for rehearing, Bar Counsel's response thereto, and petitioner's answer to the response, it is ORDERED that the Clerk is directed to schedule this matter for consideration before a merits division as soon as the calendar petmits. (By ST, RZ, KN) | |
| 06/03/1997 | | FINAL SCREENING - REGULAR CALENDAR | |
| 06/03/1997 | | LETTER TO COUNSEL/PARTY RE FUTURE CALENDARING | |
| 06/10/1997 | | LETTER FROM COUNSEL/PARTY RE FUTURE CALENDARING (respondent's) | |
| 11/06/1997 | Filed | ACTION - Argued / Submitted | |
| 11/06/1997 | | ARGUED (KG,RU,PR) STeven M. Schneebaum, Esquire, for appellant. Michael S. Frisch, Esquire, for appellee. | |
| 12/30/1997 | Filed | OUTCOME/DISPOSITION - Outcome-Disposition | |
| 12/30/1997 | | DENIED ORDERED that respondent's request to be summarily restored to the District of Columbia Bar is denied without prejudice to the filing of a petition for reinstatement. (By KG, RZ, PY) | |
| 01/14/1998 | | RECEIVED resondent's petition for rehearing and suggested rehearing en banc. | |
| 01/16/1998 | | MOTION(S) FEE PAID for motion for leave to file petititon for rehearing/rehearing en banc. | |
| 01/16/1998 | | RESP MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE PET FOR REH/REH EB | |
| 01/23/1998 | | ORDER On consideration of respondent's motion for leave to file the lodged petition for rehearing or rehearing en banc, it is ORDERED that the motion is granted and the Clerk is directed to file the lodged petition for rehearing or rehearing en banc. (AMW) | |
| 01/23/1998 | | RESP'S PETITION FOR REHEARING/REHEARING EN BANC | |
| 01/23/1998 | | PETITIONER'S ANSWER/RESPONSE (Bar Counsel) to motion of respondent for leave to file petition out of time. | |
| 02/27/1998 | | ORDER DENYING RESP PETITION FOR REH/REH EN BANC On consideration of respondent's petition for rehearing or rehearing en banc, it is ORDERED by the merits division that the petition for rehearing is denied; and it appearing that no judge of this court has called for a vote on the petition for rehearing en banc, it is FURTHER ORDERED that the petition for reheariing en banc is denied. (By WA, TE, ST, SC, FA, *KG, *RZ, RD, and *PY) | |