Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

398 S.C. 593

In re Hammer

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided June 22, 2012

Supreme Court of South Carolina · decided 2012-06-22

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently March 2016

1 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2012-06-22

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1ORDER

¶2The Office of Disciplinary Counsel petitions this Court to place respondent on interim suspension pursuant to Rule 17(b) of the Rules for Lawyer Disciplinary Enforcement (RLDE) contained in Rule 413 of the South Carolina Appellate Court Rules (SCACR).

¶3IT IS ORDERED that respondent’s license to practice law in this state is suspended until further order of this Court.

¶4IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that respondent is hereby enjoined from access to any trust account(s), escrow accounts), operating account(s), and any other law office accounts) respondent may maintain.

¶5Within five (5) days of the date of this order respondent shall provide a sworn statement advising the Court whether *594he has been retained by any clients and/or has obtained any client funds since his reinstatement on June 1, 2012.

/s/Jean H. Toal, C.J.

¶6FOR THE COURT

/398/sc/593 · .json · Public domain