Attorney Grievance v. Hammer

293 A.3d 453, 483 Md. 433

Opinion

*

IN THE

*

ATTORNEY GRIEVANCE SUPREME COURT

COMMISSION OF MARYLAND

*

OF MARYLAND

v.

*

AG Docket No. 51

RACHAEL-ANNE HAMMER

*

September Term, 2022

*

ORDER

In its Petition for Disciplinary or Remedial Action, the Attorney Grievance Commission requested that the Court impose reciprocal discipline to that imposed by the Virginia State Disciplinary Board, that is, a 60-day suspension. Pursuant to Rule 19-737(c), the Court required the Commission to serve the respondent with the petition and required the Commission and the respondent to show cause why reciprocal discipline should not be imposed. On March 13, 2023, the Commission served the respondent by alternative service. The Commission filed a response contending that no exceptional circumstances exist to warrant different discipline, and that reciprocal discipline should be imposed. Respondent did not file a response to the order to show cause.

Accordingly, it is this 21st day of April, 2023, by the Supreme Court of Maryland, ORDERED that, effective immediately, the respondent, Rachael-Anne Hammer, is suspended from the practice of law in the State of Maryland for a period of 60 days for violation of Rules 1.15, 1.16, and 8.4(b); and it is further

ORDERED that the Clerk of this Court shall strike the name of Rachael-Anne Hammer from the register of attorneys authorized to practice law in the State of Maryland and shall certify that fact to the Client Protection Fund of the Bar of Maryland and all Clerks of all judicial tribunals in this State in accordance with Maryland Rule 19-761(b).

/s/ Matthew J. Fader

Chief Justice

Pursuant to the Maryland Uniform Electronic Legal Materials Act (§§ 10-1601 et seq. of the State Government Article) this document is authentic.

2023-04-21 16:03-04:00

Gregory Hilton, Clerk