In Re Stephen Yagman

MEMORANDUM

Stephen Yagman appeals the disbarment order issued by the United States District Court for the Central District of California. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm. We review for abuse of discretion. See In re Corrinet, 645 F.3d 1141, 1145 (9th Cir.2011).

Yagman argues that the district court erred by disbarring him because the California disbarment, upon which the federal disbarment was based, “was effected without a full hearing or due process.” The district court found that although Yagman did not receive an evidentiary hearing, “he did file a brief in opposition [to disbarment], which the [California State Bar] Review Department noted and considered prior to recommending disbarment.” Because Yagman had the opportunity to, and in fact did, file briefing opposing his disbarment, and because “[t]he opportunity to brief the issue fully satisfies due process requirements,” Pac. Harbor Capital, Inc. v. Carnival Air Lines, Inc., 210 F.3d 1112, 1118 (9th Cir.2000), Yagman received due process.

Yagman next argues that because his conviction for bankruptcy fraud under 18 U.S.C. § 157 “was a legal impossibility, it could not serve as a basis for…