. In re Rothenberg, 108 IlL.2d 313, 91 IIl.Dec. 730, 484 N.E.2d 289, 293 (1985) (citations omitted). 33 . Accordingly, these issues are not in dispute and will not be considered here. 34 . In making its determination on Wiederholt's petition, the Hearing Committee rejected Wieder-holt's request to "disregard his original misconduct and focus on his present qualifications to practice." 35 . See Alaska Bar R. 29(c)(1). 36 . See, eg., In re Gutman, 599 N.E.2d 604, 608 (Ind.1992); Parker, 172 Ill.Dec. 188, 595 N.E.2d at 554-55; Greene v. Kentucky Bar Assoc., 904 S.W.2d 233, 235 (Ky.1995); In re Pool, 401 Mass. 460, 517 N.E.2d 444, 447 (1988) (stating that disbarment conclusively proves moral unfitness and remains as evidence of lack of moral fitness later); Montgomery, 566 NW.2d at 429-30 (<HOLDING>); Katz, 907 P.2d at 1031; Griffith, 913 P.2d at
holding that jury has responsibility to determine whether repair bills represent necessary and reasonable expenses holding that when a corporate petitioner has no property interest but represents individuals who live in the affected area and who potentially will suffer injury    such petitioner has standing holding that conduct leading to disbarment has great bearing on whether petitioner has honesty and integrity necessary for reinstatement holding that we cannot avoid ruling on a claim a petitioner has procedurally defaulted if the government has waived the procedural default defense for that claim holding that failure to appear for sentencing is a continuing offense because a convicted criminal has a continuing obligation to face sentencing and presents an ongoing threat to the integrity and authority of the court so long as he has not appeared