Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of the State of North Dakota v. Matson, 2017 ND 149

Jesse D. Matson was admitted to the North Dakota bar in 2011 and placed on interim suspension on September 15, 2015 pending disciplinary proceedings.
An amended petition consolidated more than twenty disciplinary files alleging misconduct in multiple client matters; Matson failed to answer and was declared in default, so allegations were deemed admitted.
The hearing panel found Matson collected advance fees but failed to maintain trust/IOLTA accounting, did not perform work, did not return unearned fees, and misappropriated/converted client funds.
The panel found pervasive incompetence and neglect: missed hearings, missed statutes of limitation, poor filings, failure to communicate with clients, abandoned practice without notice, and false statements to clients and tribunals.
Aggravating factors included prior discipline, dishonest/selfish motive, a pattern of misconduct, and multiple offenses.
The panel recommended disbarment, restitution to specified clients, payment of costs, and reimbursement to the North Dakota Client Protection Fund; the Supreme Court accepted the recommendation and ordered disbarment and specified remedies.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether admitted misconduct violated professional rules	Disciplinary Board: Matson’s admitted conduct violated multiple N.D. Rules of Professional Conduct and disciplinary rules	Matson defaulted and made no opposing arguments	Court accepted panel findings: multiple rule violations (competence, diligence, communication, fees, safekeeping, termination, candor, misconduct, notice) were established
Whether default admissibility procedure applied	Board: Matson’s failure to answer permits deeming allegations admitted under N.D.R. Lawyer Discipl. 3.1(E)(2)	No contest/defense presented due to default	Court treated allegations as admitted and relied on panel findings
Appropriate sanction for the misconduct	Board: Disbarment is appropriate given misappropriation, pattern, prior discipline, and lack of mitigation	No mitigation from Matson; no objection to panel recommendation	Court ordered immediate disbarment and found disbarment appropriate given aggravating factors
Remedies: restitution, costs, reinstatement conditions	Board: Order specified restitution to listed clients, $250 costs, reimbursement to Client Protection Fund, and five-year minimum before reinstatement	No response from Matson	Court ordered restitution amounts to specific clients within 90 days, costs of $250, reimbursement to Client Protection Fund, and reinstatement governed by N.D.R. Lawyer Discipl. 4.5 with at least five-year bar

Disciplinary Board v. Matson, 2015 ND 222, 869 N.W.2d 128 (N.D. 2015) (prior interim suspension order and procedural notice requirement under Disciplinary Rule 6.3)