Attorney Grievance v. Snyder
This text of 288 A.3d 821 (Attorney Grievance v. Snyder) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Maryland primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
* IN THE ATTORNEY GRIEVANCE * COMMISSION OF MARYLAND SUPREME COURT * OF MARYLAND v. * Misc. Docket AG No. 21 STEPHEN LAWRENCE SNYDER * September Term, 2020 *
ORDER
Stephen L. Snyder, the respondent, has filed his motion for appropriate relief
seeking reinstatement to the practice of law after he was suspended from practice by joint
motion in October 2020. At that time, Mr. Snyder consented to his suspension from the
practice of law. In his motion for appropriate relief, he has now withdrawn that consent.
Bar Counsel has taken no position on Mr. Snyder’s request for reinstatement, and the
Petition for Disciplinary or Remedial Action remains pending. Based on the information
provided by the parties, Mr. Snyder has not been found guilty or convicted of a serious
crime, such as would be required to impose an immediate temporary suspension under Rule
19-738, nor has discipline been imposed against Mr. Snyder in any other jurisdiction, nor
has a hearing judge made findings of fact and conclusions of law concerning the allegations
of the petition for this Court to review. This Court therefore currently lacks a basis to
continue Mr. Snyder’s suspension.
Accordingly, it is this 20th day of January 2023, by the Supreme Court of Maryland,
a majority of the Court concurring, ORDERED that the motion is GRANTED. In granting the motion for reinstatement,
the Court makes no findings with respect to the still-pending Petition for Disciplinary or
Remedial Action; and it is further
ORDERED that, pending further order of this Court, Stephen Lawrence Snyder is
reinstated as a member of the Bar of Maryland; and it is further
ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall replace the name Stephen Lawrence
Snyder on the register of attorneys entitled to practice law in this State and certify that fact
to the Trustees of the Client Protection Fund and the Clerks of all judicial tribunals in this
State.
/s/ Matthew J. Fader Chief Justice
*Neither Justice Booth nor Justice Biran participated in the consideration of matter.
Pursuant to the Maryland Uniform Electronic Legal Materials Act (§§ 10-1601 et seq. of the State Government Article) this document is authentic. 2023-01-20 16:00-05:00
Gregory Hilton, Clerk
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
288 A.3d 821, 482 Md. 529, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/attorney-grievance-v-snyder-md-2023.