Henry L. Klein v. Louisiana Office of Disciplinary Counsel
FirstAmendment Securities JusticiabilityDoctri
Did Louisiana ODC violate Axon Enterprise v. FTC and SEC v. Cochran principles by having a single deputy assume all prosecutorial and adjudicatory roles in a single administrative agency?
QUESTIONS PRESENTED After FNBC Bank was closed by regulators at a $1 | Billion loss, FDIC sold the bank’s loans in a secondary market at deep discounts. Girod LoanCo, created solely to purchase the loans, acquired $600,000 in debt . owed by Regina Heisler, Petitioner’s client. In defense, . Petitioner exposed GIROD as part of a $108 billion in the Cayman Islands. In / retaliation, GIROD combined with Louisiana’s Office | of Disciplinary Counsel to accuse Petitioner of filing “ .overly-zealous pleadings...” on his client’s behalf. , ODC allowed a single deputy to assume the roles of (i) ; | complainant, (ii) investigator, (iii) prosecutor, (vi) | adjudicator, and (v) appellate counsel and a single | agency to prosecute Petitioner. In lawyer-discipline | cases, Louisiana’s scheme of review is sui generis. ; Q-1. Did Louisiana ODC violate Axon Enterprise v. FTC and SEC v. Cochran principles by having a | single deputy assume all prosecutorial and adjudicatory roles in a single administrative agency? Q-2. In lawyer-conduct cases, does the Louisiana administrative scheme provide “...a meaningful judicial review...” of proceedings by two panels of nonArticle III adjudicators? Q-3. Given that after Axon/Cochran, the only question left was “...to decide where [the constitutional challenges] may be heard...”, is this Court the one and only tribunal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1257(a)? i | Q-4. Did ODC violate Petitioner’s 1°, 5 and 14” Amendment rights by subjecting him “...to an | illegitimate proceeding led by an illegitimate decision| maker.”? Axon, at p.13. . : Q-5. Was the use of the bar disciplinary process to advance GIROD’s litigation goals a malum prohibitum | as suggested at Bar Discipline, | 85 Washington University Law Quarterly 770 (2005)? | Q-6. Should the Court use its inherent powers pursuant to Chambers v. NASCO and 28 U.S.C. 1651(a) to independently investigate if GIROD ; engaged in "...fraud upon the courts ..." by weaponizing | the FNBC notes to bilk hundreds of millions of dollars | from victims of the bank collapse, including Petitioner's client? | | ii