Richard Gladstein v. Hon. J. Frank McLaughlin as Judge of the United States District Court for the District of Hawaii

Gladstein, an attorney practicing in this court, the District Court of Hawaii and several other district courts, petitions for a writ of mandamus or prohibition against the respondent, a federal judge of the District of Hawaii, having under consideration an order to Glad-stein to show cause why the court should not disbar or suspend him from practice in that court, an order issued sua sponte by respondent. The ground of the disbarment proceeding is that Gladstein had been committed to jail for a contempt committed in the trial of United States *763 vs. Dennis in the District Court of the Southern District of New York.

The ground of the petition here is that the respondent has no jurisdiction to entertain the disbarment proceeding because of the judge’s personal bias and prejudice against Gladstein stated in his affidavit which the judge, in a hearing on its sufficiency, held insufficient. The affidavit is clearly sufficient to disqualify the district judge.

Outstanding is his order, made without any hearing on the merits of the order to show cause, but at a hearing on the sufficiency of the affidavit at which Gladstein appeared, that he be suspended from further practice in the…

I concur.

While in Connelly v. United States District Court, 9 Cir., 191 F.2d 692 , it was stated that a writ of prohibition could properly issue in a case of this kind, yet after reading Korer v. Hoffman, 7 Cir., 212 F.2d 211 , I am inclined to think our footnote in the Connelly case may have misconstrued the language of Berger v. United States, 255 U.S. 22 , 41 S.Ct. 230 , 65 L.Ed. 481 . The conclusion reached in Judge Denman’s opinion happily relieves us of the necessity of reexamining the views expressed in the Connelly case.

230 F.2d 762 Richard GLADSTEIN, Petitioner, v. Hon. J. Frank McLAUGHLIN, as Judge of the United States District Court for the District of Hawaii, Respondent. No. 14639. United States Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit. April 8, 1955. Gladstein, Andersen, Leonard & Sibbett, I. M. Peckham, James B. Burns, Benjamin Dreyfus, San Francisco, Cal., Myer C. Symonds, O. P. Soares, Honolulu, Hawaii, for petitioner. Louis B. Blissard, U.S. Atty., Honolulu, Hawaii, Lloyd H. Burke, U.S. Atty., Robert H. Schnacke, Asst. U.S. Atty., San Francisco, Cal., for respondent. Before DENMAN, Chief Judge, and BONE and POPE, Circuit Judges. DENMAN, Chief Judge. 1 Gladstein, an attorney practicing in this court, the District Court of Hawaii and several other district courts, petitions for a writ of mandamus or prohibition against the respondent, a federal judge of the District of Hawaii, having under consideration an order to Gladstein to show cause why the court should not disbar or suspend him from practice in that court, an order issued sua sponte by respondent. The ground of the disbarment proceeding is that Gladstein had been committed to jail for a contempt committed in the trial of United States vs.…