Doesn't matter. Berg has never been practicing law as a lawyer anyway. Unless the threshold of practicing law is set by someone like Orly Taitz.

The better bet is.... does Berg get pro hac vice in CA?

No I haven't noticed that.

What I did notice was Orly making a stunningly stupid point about whether Liberi prepares things that Berg signs. WTF does she think an assistant does?

Yes, I have a secretary who prepares all sorts of things that I sign. When I sign those things, I take responsibility for what is in them. If it is a court filing, there are certifications inherent in my signature.

I can grab a stranger off of the street and have them draft a letter for me. Of course I am going to read it, edit it, and whatever else before signing it.

However, on routine correspondence, my secretary signs for me (of course not using my name), and there is a normal protocol for that in any business correspondence.

On the one hand, I know of no (at least public) discipline of Phil by the bar. We do know of previous sanctions and that a federal judge ordered him to attend, IIRC, ethics classes or something along those lines, related to the same incident involving the sanctions. (perhaps he's never paid the sanctions or the fees?)

On the other hand, the judge in CEL3 v Daylight, et al. said he could file papers until noon today, including an update of his disciplinary hearing, and he's not done so (though I'm not certain they would appear on the docket, based on what they relate to), so I take that as a not good outcome.

Since AFAIK this is his first disciplinary appearance before the bar, I'm going to say no disciplinary action beyond attending some sort of remedial program such as ethics.

Now that's going out on a limb.

My IANAL or a SECR guess is 6mo. suspension, and a fine.

I have not made an exhaustive study of PA disciplinary cases, but in those opinions that I have read there is often a significant delay between a disciplinary board hearing and the board rendering their decision.

The hearing is generally before a committee of the board, which then must make a recommendation regarding the appropriate discipline to the whole board. There may often be briefs filed by defense and disciplinary counsel after the hearing, plus an opportunity to appeal a recommendation before it is made final by the Board.

So it is entirely possible that no decision was made at the hearing yesterday and that no determination will be known for several months or longer. Berg might want to disclose the nature of the petition against him and the arguments at the hearing, but probably has nothing concrete to report to the CA judge.

One case I know of, for practicing after being disbarred on consent, had the following timeline

Contempt petition filed with the Supreme Court in September 2004,

Supreme Court issued an Order to Show Cause in November 2004,

a finding of contempt was made in early March 2005,

a petition for reconsideration was filed in late March 2005

a decision on reconsideration was reserved pending the outcome of another matter,

reconsideration was later denied in July of 2006,

a sanction hearing was held in September 2006,

following briefs from the parties, the hearing committee issued recommendations in April 2007,

exceptions were filed by both sides and a request for oral argument,

oral argument was held in June 2007 and

the matter was finally adjudicated in July 2007 - $1,000 fine and delay in seeking reinstatement to August 2010.

The Disciplinary Board's opinion is dated September 2007 - so start to finish was 3 years, for a guy who was already disbarred but got caught practicing.

Do we know what the bar hearing is on? I'd bet public reprimand, fine, and maybe a stayed suspension unless it's something along the lines of commingling funds or violating PA Rule 1.8(j).

Whatever happened yesterday, I think it's probably true that that Berg can presently claim that his license to practice law remains in good standing. If the ultimate outcome is a suspension or disbarment, that must be ordered by the PA Supreme Court.

So, weasel that he is, I'm betting that any filing by Berg will consist of a terse statement limited to the current status of his law license. (Yeah, I know, I know. A terse filing by Berg? An impossibility, I suppose. He can always flesh out the page count with invective directed at Orly.)

OTOH, I see at least some possibility that, if things in PA broke really badly for him yesterday, he might withdraw his PHV application. I mean, how much fun could it be to travel to California to be interrogated by a skeptical Federal judge who has discretion to deny his PHV application even if the disciplinary procedings are far from final?

I don't think he needs leave of court to withdraw from the case at this point (not having entered an appearance) but he would be wise to deal with the judge's order for him to appear on Monday.

I'm going to lowball it at 1-3 months, less if he pleads, because of his lack of prior discipline. I'd have picked your range, but instead, I'm picking this because I don't want to share the imaginary pool of quatloos with all the people who are likely to pick your range, which is more likely than mine to come in. I bet 100 quatloos.

Not for his repeated and continuous misconduct for the last decade. While Res may disagree, I think nothing less than a public whipping and disbarment would do. However, since Pennsylvania has rejected Sharia law, I doubt there will be a public whipping.

Plus he has his name on a precedential eligibility Federal standing/political question case. Ask Mario.

Obviously, it depends on the nature and circumstances of the complaint but, hey...I'll play!

Suspension: 1 year + 1 day.

I'm going low - reprimand and a mandatory course.

I grew up not far from a state prison which, what seems not many years ago, was indeed equipped with a whipping post. Delaware was the last state to have abolished whipping as a penalty in 1972. The prison was decommissioned at around the same time, and they provided public tours prior to demolishing the building. The one thing everyone wanted to see was the whipping post, as referral to it was a common parental threat in that area.

I would want Berg and Taitz to both be dropped onto a remote island somewhere. They each get a tent, a supply of food, and a loaded gun is hidden somewhere on the island.

FIFY

They must have stocks.

Berg filed for bankruptcy a few months ago. Isn't it common practice that whenever an active member of the bar files for bankruptcy, disciplinary counsel conducts an investigation?

Not that I am aware. Which Rule of Professional Responsibility is violated by bankruptcy? Unless the attorney misappropriated monies from the client trust account to pay personal or office expenses, I don't see how the attorney's personal finances are any of the bar's business.

They might be if they impact character somehow. At least one attorney was denied admission for excessive debts, but the attendant circumstances were such that it was clear that he had made no effort whatsoever to pay them over a course of years. Personally, I think he should be admitted as a matter of economic efficiency, because it makes no sense to leave him with no ability to pay off these debts, but it should be on a probationary basis, and only after he puts together a plan that demonstrates his sincerity and as a practical matter, would actually get some of this money paid back.

The way it was explained in PR is that it's done because the attorney's financial mismanagement raises questions about their fitness to practice law and/or safeguard client assets and funds.

Because of due process implications in depriving one of a livelihood, attorney discipline must be based upon actual misconduct in handling client trust funds, not conjecture about whether he/she might be tempted to put a hand in the cookie jar.

Dr Obly posts a whole bunch of Bergy/Liberi Bar-y stuff :

Petition for Disciplinary Action Against Berg and Response
XXX-http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=19388

Cover Email of Petition for Discipline
http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Cover-Email-of-Petition-for-Discipline.pdf

Petition for Discipline
http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/img-224145617-0001.pdf

Cover Email of Response to Petition for Discipline
http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Cover-Email-of-Response-to-the-Petition-for-Discipline.pdf

Response to Petition for Discipline pp 1-43
http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/img-224145723-0001-pp-1-43.pdf

[ Mildly amusing .. client's notes, search warrant reciepts etc .. saw something about client's hubby's "Hells Angel" card somewhere in it ...]

Response to Petition for Discipline pp 44-82
http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/img-224145723-0001-pp-44-82.pdf

Every document filed in the Lincoln v Daylight case can be found here

http://www.scribd.com/my_document_collections/2691259

And they are all linked to there in the CELIII v Daylight Chemical, et al. thread.

i find it hard to believe Orly will post all the docs in that case as they talk about her being a naughty dentist with CEL3. She's only posting what she believes makes Berg look like a bad boy.

Too bad we don't have all the complaints filed against her and investigated by the Cali bar to post. Or even better that they were public and CEL3/Berg could file 'em. Alas, the Cali bar doesn't operate on the same rules as PA.

I'm going with "no sanction" on this one, and blaming Orly for it.

IMHO, she just did Berg a tremendous favor, and probably has no idea why.

'splain, Lucy.