Eisenberg v. Fox
CourtDistrict Court, District of Columbia
Date FiledAugust 5, 2026
DocketCivil Action No. 2026-1435
JudgeJudge Royce C. Lamberth
StatusPublished
📰 News Coverage: Read the LAWS.com news report on this case
Full Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
MICHAEL D.J. EISENBERG,
Plaintiff,
v. Civil Action No. 26-cv-01435-RCL
HAMILTON FOX, III, et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Pro se plaintiff Michael D.J. Eisenberg, Esq., filed this lawsuit advancing constitutional
and other legal challenges to actions that officials at the District of Columbia Office of
Disciplinary Counsel and the District of Columbia Court of Appeals Board on Professional
Responsibility took while he was petitioning for a negotiated discipline regarding attorney
misconduct allegations. He also challenges actions that they might take during a disciplinary
hearing scheduled to take place this month before a Hearing Committee acting under the
auspices of the Board on Professional Responsibility.
The gist of Eisenberg's dispute revolves around the question of whether Disciplinary
Counsel may lawfully impeach an attorney using admissions contained in a petition for a
negotiated discipline that was executed and filed-but that Disciplinary Counsel unilaterally
withdrew before a Hearing Committee could consider and formally reject it. As will be
explained, however, the abstention doctrine recognized in Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37
( 1971 ), and its progeny preclude the Court from exercising federal jurisdiction to address this