Without Jurisdiction

The North Carolina Court of Appeals held that the State Bar could not exercise jurisdiction over an attorney practicing federal law within its borders

Defendant appeals from an Order of Discipline and an Order on Motion for Relief from Judgment and Lifting Stay from the North Carolina State Bar Disciplinary Hearing Commission. Defendant is an attorney licensed by the State of New York who practices in the federal immigration court in North Carolina, but he is not and has never been admitted to practice in the North Carolina courts. Based on the plain language of North Carolina General Statute Section 84-28, which grants “disciplinary jurisdiction” to the Disciplinary Hearing Commission over “[a]ny attorney admitted to practice law in this State[,]” the Disciplinary Hearing Commission did not have subject matter jurisdiction to issue an Order of Discipline of Defendant, so we reverse the Order of Discipline and the Order on Motion for Relief from Judgment and Lifting Stay. N.C. Gen. Stat. § 84-28 (2023)

The bar investigation began with an overdraft on the defendant’s North Carolina trust account.

To obtain jurisdiction over this “pocket of lawyers,” the State Bar asks us to rewrite North Carolina General Statute Section 84-28 to apply to “any attorney admitted to practice law” in any state if the attorney practices in a federal court physically located in North Carolina or has an office in North Carolina for a federal practice. But this Court does not have the authority to rewrite the statute to cover this group of attorneys who practice only in federal court and are licensed by another state. Defendant is a member of and subject to discipline by the New York Bar. As an attorney practicing before the federal immigration court, Defendant is also subject to discipline by the Executive Office for Immigration Review.

…This Court’s role is to interpret and apply the law as it is written. If the General Assembly would like to expand the disciplinary jurisdiction of the State Bar to cover attorneys who are not admitted to practice in North Carolina, it may do so by statutory amendment, but this Court may not rewrite the statutes.

(Mike Frisch)