IN THE SUPREME COURT

STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA 

2023 ND 159

In the Matter of the Application for 

Disciplinary Action Against Stephen J. 

Baird, a Person Previously Admitted to 

the Bar of the State of North Dakota 

 ---------- 

Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court 

of the State of North Dakota, Petitioner 

 v. 

Stephen J. Baird, Respondent 

No. 20230075

Application for disciplinary action.

SUSPENSION ORDERED. 

Per Curiam. 

FILED 

IN THE OFFICE OF THE 

CLERK OF SUPREME COURT 

AUGUST 17, 2023 

STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA
1

Disciplinary Board v. Baird

No. 20230075

Per Curiam

[¶1] The Supreme Court has before it a report from a hearing panel of the 

disciplinary board recommending Stephen J. Baird be suspended from the 

practice of law in North Dakota for 60 days, refund clients in the amount of 

$3000 and pay $250 in costs and expenses of the disciplinary proceeding. We 

adopt the hearing panel’s findings and recommended sanctions as explained 

below, and order suspension. 

[¶2] Baird was admitted to practice law in North Dakota on September 27, 

2013. Effective July 21, 2022, Baird was disbarred. See Disciplinary Bd. v. 

Baird, 2022 ND 146, 977 N.W.2d 702. Baird was again disbarred effective 

December 8, 2022. See Disciplinary Bd. v. Baird, 2022 ND 227, 985 N.W.2d 56. 

Baird was the owner and sole partner of Baird Law, which was located in 

Fargo, North Dakota. 

[¶3] On August 4, 2022, Baird was served with a summons and petition for 

discipline. Baird failed to answer the petition and Disciplinary Counsel moved 

for default. Baird is in default and the charges in the amended petition for 

discipline are deemed admitted under N.D.R. Lawyer Discipl. 3. l(E)(2).

[¶4] On February 27, 2023, the hearing panel filed default findings of fact, 

conclusions of law, and recommendations for discipline. The hearing panel 

found that Baird was retained to represent a husband and wife to file for 

bankruptcy. Baird assigned an associate attorney to handle the file. The 

associate attorney failed to act with reasonable diligence and promptness and 

Baird took over representation. Baird also failed to act with reasonable 

diligence and promptness, failed to keep the clients reasonably informed about 

the status of their matter, failed to respond to reasonable requests for 

information, failed to take steps reasonably necessary to protect the clients’ 

interests after the attorney-client relationship broke down, and failed to take 

reasonable remedial action with respect to his associate’s handling of the 

bankruptcy. 
2

[¶5] The hearing panel concluded Baird’s conduct violated N.D.R.Prof. 

Conduct 1.3, Diligence, by failing to act with reasonable diligence and 

promptness after he informed the clients he would be taking over their 

bankruptcy; 1.4, Communication, by failing to communicate with the clients

regarding their case when he took over handling their case on behalf of the 

firm; 1.16(e), Declining or Terminating Representation, by failing to take 

reasonable steps to protect the clients’ interests after the attorney-client

relationship broke down by returning any file materials or refund any 

unearned retainer funds; and 5.1(c)(2), Responsibilities of Partners, Managers, 

and Supervisory Attorneys, by failing to take reasonable remedial action with 

respect to his associate’s lack of diligence and communication in handling the 

file when he became aware of her failures. The hearing panel concluded the 

clients were injured as a result of Baird’s conduct because their case was

delayed, they have been unable to get a copy of their file, and they have not 

received a return of any unearned funds. 

[¶6] The hearing panel considered aggravating factors of prior disciplinary 

offenses, a pattern of misconduct, and a demonstrated indifference to making 

resolution. It considered mitigating factors of imposition of other penalties and 

sanctions and remoteness of prior offenses. The hearing panel recommended 

that Baird be suspended for 60 days; pay restitution to the clients, and pay

costs and expenses of the disciplinary proceedings. 

[¶7] The hearing panel’s report was served on Baird and disciplinary counsel 

on March 10, 2023, and forwarded to the Supreme Court. Objections were due 

within 20 days of service of the report. No objections were received, and the 

matter was submitted to the Court for consideration. 

[¶8] Under N.D.R. Lawyer Discipl. 4.5(c), a short or long suspension can be 

imposed. A short suspension is six months or less and a long suspension is 

more than six months. A lawyer is not required to prove rehabilitation and can 

resume practice after a short suspension. A lawyer is required to prove 

rehabilitation and apply for reinstatement as a result of a long suspension. 

After review of the matter, we concluded a long suspension of six months and 

one day rather than a short suspension of six months is the appropriate 
3

sanction for Baird’s conduct under the North Dakota Standards for Imposing 

Lawyer Sanctions. Because we intended to deviate from the recommended 

sanction to impose a suspension of six months and one day, the parties were 

provided an opportunity to file objections. Objections were due on or before 

April 26, 2023. No objections were received.

[¶9] IT IS ORDERED, that Stephen J. Baird is SUSPENDED from the 

practice of law for six months and one day, effective immediately.

[¶10] IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Baird pay restitution to the clients in 

the amount of $3,000 within 30 days of entry of judgment.

[¶11] IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Baird pay the costs and expenses of 

these disciplinary proceedings in the amount of $250, payable to the Secretary 

of the Disciplinary Board, 600 East Boulevard Avenue, Dept. 180, Bismarck, 

North Dakota 58505-0530, within 30 days of entry of judgment. 

[¶12] IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that for any amounts already paid by the 

North Dakota Client Protection Fund on Baird’s behalf, he make restitution 

within 90 days of entry of the judgment. For any amounts relating to this 

matter paid in the future by the North Dakota Client Protection Fund, Baird

make restitution to the Fund within 90 days of receiving notice payment was 

made.

[¶13] IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Baird comply with N.D.R. Lawyer 

Discipl. 6.3 regarding notice. 

[¶14] Jon J. Jensen, C.J.

Daniel J. Crothers

Lisa Fair McEvers

Jerod E. Tufte

Douglas A. Bahr