In re Hessel
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Error! Main Document Only.Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the Atlantic and Maryland Reporters. Users are requested to notify the Clerk of the Court of any formal errors so that corrections may be made before the bound volumes go to press. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS No. 23-BG-0115 IN RE MARK L. HESSEL A Suspended Member of the Bar of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals DDN: 2022-D204 Bar Registration No. 333344 BEFORE: Blackburne-Rigsby, Chief Judge, and Easterly and Howard, Associate Judges. ORDER (FILED—April 27, 2023) On consideration of the certified order from the state of Maryland disbarring respondent from the practice of law by consent; this court’s February 24, 2023, order suspending respondent pending disposition of this matter and directing him to show cause why reciprocal discipline should not be imposed; and the statement of Disciplinary Counsel wherein he requests that reinstatement be conditioned upon respondent’s reinstatement in Maryland; and it appearing that respondent has not filed a response or his D.C. Bar R. XI, § 14(g) affidavit, it is ORDERED that Mark L. Hessel is hereby disbarred from the practice of law in the District of Columbia and that prior to filing a petition for reinstatement respondent must first be reinstated to practice law in the state of Maryland. See In re Sibley, 990 A.2d 483, 487-88 (D.C. 2010) (explaining that there is a rebuttable presumption in favor of imposition of identical discipline and exceptions to this presumption should be rare); In re Fuller, 930 A.2d 194, 198 (D.C. 2007) (explaining that a rebuttable presumption of identical reciprocal discipline applies unless one of the exceptions is established); see also In re Hoffman, 267 A.3d 1016 (D.C. 2022) (conditioning eligibility to seek reinstatement on readmission in original disciplining jurisdiction). It is No. 23-BG-0115 FURTHER ORDERED that, for purposes of reinstatement, Mr. Hessel’s disbarment will not begin to run until such time as he files an affidavit that fully complies with the requirements of D.C. Bar R. XI, § 14(g). PER CURIAM
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
