Eisenberg v. Fox

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

MICHAEL D.J. EISENBERG, Plaintiff,

v. Civil Action No. 26-cv-01435-RCL HAMILTON FOX, III, et al., Defendants.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Pro se plaintiff Michael D.J. Eisenberg, Esq., filed this lawsuit advancing constitutional and other legal challenges to actions that officials at the District of Columbia Office of Disciplinary Counsel and the District of Columbia Court of Appeals Board on Professional Responsibility took while he was petitioning for a negotiated discipline regarding attorney misconduct allegations. He also challenges actions that they might take during a disciplinary hearing scheduled to take place this month before a Hearing Committee acting under the auspices of the Board on Professional Responsibility.

The gist of Eisenberg's dispute revolves around the question of whether Disciplinary Counsel may lawfully impeach an attorney using admissions contained in a petition for a negotiated discipline that was executed and filed-but that Disciplinary Counsel unilaterally withdrew before a Hearing Committee could consider and formally reject it. As will be explained, however, the abstention doctrine recognized in Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37 ( 1971 ), and its progeny preclude the Court from exercising federal jurisdiction to address this