In the Application, Fisher certified to the Court that he had “not been reprimanded in any court nor ha[d] there been any action in any court pertaining to [his] conduct or fitness as a member of the bar.” Upon review of the Application, the Court took judicial notice of the fact that Fisher had been publicly reprimanded on January 30, 2014 under procedures established in Part Six, § IV, ¶ 13-15.B.4 of the Rules of the Supreme Court of Virginia. In the Matter of Douglass Hayden Fisher, VSB Docket No. 13-032-094098 (3d. District Subcommittee, Sec. II 2014). The Virginia State Bar entered its reprimand of Fisher after two hearings conducted on December 20, 2013 and January 23, 2014. The Virginia State Bar found that Fisher had violated several Virginia Rules of Professional Conduct. Specifically, the Virginia State Bar found that Fisher had violated rules pertaining to diligence, communication, safekeeping of property, and declining or terminating representation. Fisher did not appeal the reprimand to the Supreme Court of Virginia. See Rules of the Supreme Court of Virginia, Part VI, § IV, ¶13-26.

1. UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA
RICHMOND DIVISION
In the Matter of:
DOUGLASS HAYDEN FISHER, Misc. Pro. No. 15-00301-KRH
ORDER DENYING APPLICATION TO QUALIFY AS ATTORNEY
and
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
On March 23, 2015, Douglass Hayden Fisher (“Fisher”) submitted an Application to
Qualify as an Attorney for the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of
Virginia (the “Application”). This matter comes before the Court to consider Fisher’s
Application under Local Bankruptcy Rule 2090-1. “A federal court has an inherent power ‘to
control admission to its bar and to discipline attorneys who appear before it.’” In re Parker, No.
3:14cv241, 2014 WL 4809844, at *5 (E.D. Va. Sept. 26, 2014) (quoting Chambers v. NASCO,
Inc., 501 U.S. 32, 43 (1991)).
In the Application, Fisher certified to the Court that he had “not been reprimanded in any
court nor ha[d] there been any action in any court pertaining to [his] conduct or fitness as a
member of the bar.” Upon review of the Application, the Court took judicial notice of the fact
that Fisher had been publically reprimanded on January 30, 2014 under procedures established in
Part Six, § IV, ¶ 13-15.B.4 of the Rules of the Supreme Court of Virginia. In the Matter of
Douglass Hayden Fisher, VSB Docket No. 13-032-094098 (3d. District Subcommittee, Sec. II
2014). The Virginia State Bar entered its reprimand of Fisher after two hearings conducted on
December 20, 2013 and January 23, 2014. The Virginia State Bar found that Fisher had violated
Case 15-00301-KRH Doc 6 Filed 04/09/15 Entered 04/09/15 14:00:26 Desc Main
Document Page 1 of 3

2. several Virginia Rules of Professional Conduct. Specifically, the Virginia State Bar found that
Fisher had violated rules pertaining to diligence, communication, safekeeping of property, and
declining or terminating representation. Fisher did not appeal the reprimand to the Supreme
Court of Virginia. See Rules of the Supreme Court of Virginia, Part VI, § IV, ¶13-26.
As a result of Fisher’s failure to disclosure the reprimand in his Application, the Court
opened this miscellaneous proceeding on April 2, 2015 and set Fisher’s Application for hearing
on April 8, 2015 (the “Hearing”). The Court sent notice of the Hearing to Fisher on April 4,
2015, by first class mail to Douglass Hayden Fisher, Fisher Law, PO Box 7321, 2401 West Main
Street, Richmond, VA 23220-4436, which is the address Fisher provided to the Court in
connection with his Application materials. Despite the issuance of due and proper notice via first
class mail, Fisher failed to appear at the Hearing. Fed R. Bankr. P. 7004(b)(1).
Virginia Code section 54.1-3910 authorizes the Virginia State Bar, as an administrative
agency of the Supreme Court of Virginia, to enforce the Virginia Rules of Professional Conduct.
It appearing to the Court that the Virginia State Bar duly exercised the authority granted to it by
the Supreme Court of Virginia when it publically reprimanded Fisher, and as Fisher did not
appear at the Hearing to provide any contradictory evidence to alleviate the Court’s concerns
pertaining to his fitness to practice law as a member of the bar of this Court, and as Fisher has
not provided any explanation for his failure to disclose his prior public reprimand, the Court
cannot now find that Fisher truthfully certified that he “has not been reprimanded in any court
nor has there been any action in any court pertaining to [his] conduct or fitness as a member of
the bar.” Accordingly, the Court will deny Fisher’s Application pending further hearing at which
Fisher shall appear and show cause why he should not be sanctioned for submitting an
Application to the Court with a false certification.
Case 15-00301-KRH Doc 6 Filed 04/09/15 Entered 04/09/15 14:00:26 Desc Main
Document Page 2 of 3

3. In consideration whereof, it is
ORDERED that Fisher’s Application be and it hereby is DENIED pending further
hearing on the Court’s Order to show cause, and it is
FURTHER ORDERED that the Fisher’s right to participate in the Court’s CM/ECF
System be and it hereby is TERMINATED subject to further order of the Court, and it is
FURTHER ORDERED that Douglass Hayden Fisher shall appear before the Court on
Wednesday, May 6, 2015, at 12:00 P.M. in Judge Huennekens’ Courtroom, Room 5000, U.S.
Courthouse, 701 East Broad Street, Richmond, VA 23219, and show cause why he should not be
sanctioned for submitting an Application to the Court with a false certification, and it is
FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk’s Office shall serve a copy of this Order via first
class mail to the following addresses: (i) Douglass Hayden Fisher, Fisher Law, PO Box 7321,
Richmond, VA 23220-4436, and (ii) Douglass Hayden Fisher, Fisher Law, 2401 West Main
Street, Richmond, VA 23220-4436. Additionally, the Clerk’s Office shall deliver a copy of this
Order to Fisher electronically at hfisher@fisherlawrva.com.
ENTERED: April 9, 2015
/s/ Kevin R. Huennekens
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY JUDGE
ENTERED ON DOCKET: April 9, 2015
Case 15-00301-KRH Doc 6 Filed 04/09/15 Entered 04/09/15 14:00:26 Desc Main
Document Page 3 of 3