Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Ostendorp

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCAD-15-0000081 17-JAN-2017 12:39 PM SCAD-15-0000081 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI'I OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL, Petitioner, vs. MICHAEL G.M. OSTENDORP, Respondent. ORIGINAL PROCEEDING (ODC CASE NO. 10-057-8891) ORDER OF REINSTATEMENT (By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Pollack, and Wilson, JJ.) Upon consideration of the December 23, 2016 petition and affidavit submitted by Respondent Michael G.M. Ostendorp and the record, it appears Respondent Ostendorp has complied with all relevant requirements upon which his six-month period of suspension from the practice of law is contingent, and has complied with the requirements of Rule 2.16 of the Rules of the Supreme Court of the State of Hawai'i (RSCH), though we note Respondent Ostendorp still must complete an audit of his practice as provided in this court’s May 3, 2016 order. It further appears the Office of Disciplinary Counsel was served notice of the affidavit, as required by RSCH Rule 2.17(b). Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that, pursuant to RSCH Rule 2.17(b), Respondent Ostendorp is reinstated to the practice of law in the jurisdiction of the State of Hawai'i, effective upon entry of this order. DATED: Honolulu, Hawai'i, January 17, 2017. /s/ Mark E. Recktenwald /s/ Paula A. Nakayama /s/ Sabrina S. McKenna /s/ Richard W. Pollack /s/ Michael D. Wilson 2

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.