Jack Jordan v. United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit

Whether a federal appeals court has the power to disbar an attorney by denying the attorney an evidentiary hearing (which the attorney requested) based on judges’ cursory conclusory contention that the attorney’s “arguments” are “largely frivolous and conclusory.”

Whether a federal appeals court has the power to disbar an attorney based on nothing more than judges’ mere conclusory contention that some unidentified “evidence” of some unidentified attorney “misconduct” merely was “set forth” in inadmissible hearsay in a prior “order.”

Whether federal judges have the power to create (or imply) an evidentiary privilege for judges to allow judges to avoid testifying (under oath subject to cross-examination) when judges’ hearsay is the purported “evidence” used to justify disbarring an attorney.

Whether a federal court may disbar an attorney based on a prior court’s purported disciplinary action without affording such attorney notice identifying particular purported misconduct and all facts material to proving such misconduct and affording such attorney a reasonable opportunity to respond to such notice.