No. 24-31

Michael J. Libman, et al. v. Antwon Jones, et al.

Lower Court: California
Docketed: 2024-07-12
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Experienced Counsel
Tags: ability-to-pay attorney-fees disgorgement eighth-amendment excessive-fines professional-conduct proportionality-test
Key Terms:
DueProcess Punishment Securities Privacy ClassAction
Latest Conference: 2024-09-30
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Does the court-ordered disgorgement of attorney fees for violation of state rules of professional conduct fall under the 'excessive fines' clause of the Eighth Amendment where there has been only benefit to the clients and no assessment of the attorney's ability to pay?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTION PRESENTED This Court has used a proportionality test in analyzing whether a state imposed fine is excessive under the Eighth Amendment but has not yet had the opportunity to apply the test to court-ordered disgorgement of attorney fees for violation of a state’s rules of professional conduct. The question presented is: Does the court-ordered disgorgement of attorney fees for violation of state rules of professional conduct fall under the “excessive fines” clause of the Eighth Amendment where there has been only benefit to the clients and no assessment of the attorney’s ability to pay?

Docket Entries

2024-10-07
Petition DENIED.
2024-08-28
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/30/2024.
2024-07-08
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due August 12, 2024)
2024-05-22
Application (23A1044) granted by Justice Kagan extending the time to file until July 8, 2024.
2024-05-17
Application (23A1044) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from May 28, 2024 to July 8, 2024, submitted to Justice Kagan.

Attorneys

Michael J. Libman, et al.
David ZarmiZarmi Law, Petitioner
David ZarmiZarmi Law, Petitioner