In Re Jerome B. Rosenthal, Esq.

This court issued an order to show cause why Jerome Rosenthal should not be disbarred from the practice of law in this court following his disbarment from the Supreme Court of California. A motions panel then granted Rosenthal’s request under Fed.R.App.P. 46(b) for a hearing.

A determination of disbarment by a state court is not conclusively binding on the federal courts. Theard v. United States, 354 U.S. 278, 282 , 77 S.Ct. 1274, 1276-77 , 1 L.Ed.2d 1342 (1956). Nevertheless, the state court determination is entitled to great deference and recognition absent the following conditions: (1) the state procedure did not provide adequate notice and an opportunity to be heard; (2) the proof of facts establishing the “want of fair private and professional character” were so infirm that the court should not accept the state court’s decision; or (3) some other grave reason existed that should prevent the court from recognizing the state court’s determination. Selling v. Radford, 243 U.S. 46 , 51, 37 S.Ct. 377 , 379, 61 L.Ed. 585 (1916).

Under Selling, the federal court must make “an intrinsic consideration of the state record” to determine whether one of the above conditions is present.…