In Re Steven Kramer

Good Law
2002 Daily Journal DAR 2643·282 F.3d 721·2002 WL 342060·2002 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2130·2002 U.S. App. LEXIS 3514
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 6, 200201-55115California3,091 words

Opinion

Opinion

O'Scannlain, J.

We must decide whether a federal district in California may impose reciprocal discipline by disbarring an attorney on the basis of his disbarment from practice in New York.

I

In 1998, Steven Kramer was disbarred from practice in the State of New York. The misconduct that gave rise to his disbarment is described in In re Kramer (“Kramer I”), 235 A.D.2d 87 , 664 N.Y.S.2d 1 (App.Div.1997), where the First Department of New York’s Appellate Division found Kramer guilty of professional misconduct based on his misdeeds in two separate cases: one in New York, in which a federal district court dismissed Kramer’s client’s complaint and imposed sanctions on Kramer, id. at 2, and one in New Jersey, which resulted in Kramer’s suspension from practice before the courts of New Jersey for a period of six months, id. at 4. The Appellate Division then referred Kramer’s case to the First Department’s Disciplinary Committee “to consider evidence in mitigation or aggravation, ... and to recommend the appropriate sanctions.” Id.

After a hearing, the Committee recommended disbarment. The Appellate Division agreed, noting that over the course of eleven years, Kramer had been “sanctioned, criticized,…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.