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

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
John Doe and Richard H. Foster v. The State Bar of California, Michael E. Wald and David L. Frey, Jr., 582 F.2d 25 (9th Cir. 1978)
1978 U.S. App. LEXIS 8982
Merrill, Per Curiam, Tang, Taylor

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

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

This appeal is from the judgment of the district court dismissing this action to en *26 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 California, 415 F.Supp. 308 (N.D.Cal. 1976). See also MacKay v. Nesbett, 412 F.2d 846 (9th Cir. 1969), cert. denied 396 U.S. 960, 90 S.Ct. 435, 24 L.Ed.2d 425 (1969).

Affirmed.

Reference

Full Case Name
John DOE and Richard H. Foster, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. the STATE BAR OF CALIFORNIA, Michael E. Wald and David L. Frey, Jr., Defendants-Appellees
Cited By
9 cases
Status
Published