MATTER OF TEITELBAUM, 12100.
| Citation | 253 F.2d 1 |
| Decision Date | 05 March 1958 |
| Docket Number | No. 12100.,12100. |
| Parties | In the Matter of Abraham TEITELBAUM. Appeal of R. TIEKEN, United States Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois. |
| Court | United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (7th Circuit) |
Robert Tieken, U. S. Atty., John Peter Lulinski, William A. Barnett, Asst. U. S. Attys., Chicago, Ill. (Edwin A. Strugala, Asst. U. S. Atty., Chicago, Ill., of counsel), for appellant.
Abraham Teitelbaum, Chicago, Ill., for appellee.
Before DUFFY, Chief Judge, and HASTINGS and PARKINSON, Circuit Judges.
R. Tieken is the United States Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois. Mr. Tieken requested and received permission to file with the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, a petition asking that Abraham Teitelbaum, an attorney licensed to practice at the bar of that Court, be disbarred. Under the rules of the District Court the petition was referred to the Executive Committee of that Court which was composed of three judges. This Committee referred the matter to Honorable Philip L. Sullivan who is now Chief Judge of that Court.
The petition alleged Teitelbaum had been found guilty of felonies on two occasions, the offense charged in each case being a wilful attempt to evade income tax in violation of Title 26 U.S.C.A. § 145(b). Teitelbaum filed an answer denying he had been convicted of felonies and alleged that in one case sentence had been suspended, and that the second case involved a misdemeanor. Mr. Tieken filed a reply submitting the text of the judgments in the two cases. No oral testimony was taken. After considering the pleadings, the record and the briefs, Judge Sullivan filed his decision denying the petition for disbarment. Mr. Tieken filed a notice of appeal to this Court. He made no request of the District Court for permission to prosecute this appeal.
It is a rare situation indeed where a United States District Court has determined an attorney should not be disbarred, that anyone has claimed the authority to bring such a decision before an appellate court for review. We know of only one such case,1 and there the question was presented in an entirely different posture. Here the District Court is satisfied to have Teitelbaum's name remain upon the role of attorneys authorized to practice at the bar of that Court. The only attempt being made to force the District Court to take a contrary action is by Mr. R. Tieken who happens to be the United States Attorney.
Mr. Tieken argues that the offenses charged in the two criminal prosecutions were, in fact, felonies. He then points to local Rule 8 of the Rules of the District Court for the Northern District of Illinois which states that an attorney who has been convicted of a felony shall be disbarred.
The prosecutions of Teitelbaum for income tax evasion were before Judge J. Sam Perry of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. Judge Perry handled the cases in some respects as though the convictions had been for misdemeanors. He did not impose any sentence in the first case, but imposed probation for a period of twelve months. It appears this prosecution was conducted a considerable period after a jeopardy assessment had been levied and the amount claimed to be due had been paid with penalties and interest. In fact, Teitelbaum claimed that he...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Starr v. Mandanici
...where nothing in record indicated that it had an interest in the matter or was a party to the underlying suit); In re Teitelbaum, 253 F.2d 1, 2 (7th Cir.1958) (holding that a complainant has no standing "as a party or otherwise" to 20 Rule 8.3 requires that "[a] lawyer having knowledge that......
-
Ramos Colon v. U.S. Atty. for Dist. of Puerto Rico
...of Phillips, 510 F.2d 126, 127 (2d Cir. 1975) (per curiam); In re Echeles, 430 F.2d 347, 350 (7th Cir. 1970); In Matter of Teitelbaum, 253 F.2d 1, 2 (7th Cir. 1958). The remaining sanctions available to the district court, reprimand, imposition of costs, and reporting the misconduct to the ......
-
Teitelbaum, In re
...rolls of the United States District court was denied. An appeal was taken to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh District, 253 F.2d 1, and, upon motion, that court dismissed the appeal. Respondent contends that the decisions of those courts should be conclusive as res judicat......
-
In re Auerhahn
...of a disciplinary panel without the district court's permission. In re Echeles, 430 F.2d 347, 350–51 (7th Cir.1970); In re Teitelbaum, 253 F.2d 1, 1–3 (7th Cir.1958). Bar Counsel concedes that a private party may not appeal a disciplinary panel's decision, but she asserts that she investiga......