From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Hitselberger

Supreme Court of South Carolina
Jul 12, 1999
518 S.E.2d 40 (S.C. 1999)

Opinion

No. 24967

Submitted June 29, 1999

Decided July 12, 1999

Mykel Hitselberger, pro se.

Henry B. Richardson, Jr., for the Office of the Disciplinary Counsel.


By order dated December 2, 1998, respondent was indefinitely suspended from the practice of law in the State of Maryland. A letter from the Clerk of this Court, dated May 20, 1999, notifying respondent that he had thirty (30) days in which to inform this Court of any reason the imposition of the identical discipline should not be imposed on respondent in this state was sent to respondent at his last two known addresses. See Rule 29(b), RLDE, Rule 413, SCACR. Both letters were returned, one because the forwarding address had expired and the other because the letter was unclaimed. The Court has not otherwise received a response from respondent. Finding a sufficient attempt has been made to serve notice on respondent, and finding none of the factors in Rule 29(d), RLDE, Rule 413, SCACR, present in this matter, we hereby suspend respondent indefinitely from the practice of law in this state. Within fifteen (15) days of the date of this opinion, respondent shall file an affidavit with the Clerk of Court showing that he has complied with Rule 30, RLDE, Rule 413, SCACR.

INDEFINITE SUSPENSION.


Summaries of

In re Hitselberger

Supreme Court of South Carolina
Jul 12, 1999
518 S.E.2d 40 (S.C. 1999)
Case details for

In re Hitselberger

Case Details

Full title:IN THE MATTER OF MYKEL HITSELBERGER, RESPONDENT

Court:Supreme Court of South Carolina

Date published: Jul 12, 1999

Citations

518 S.E.2d 40 (S.C. 1999)
518 S.E.2d 40