2020 WI 32

SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN

CASE NO.: 2018AP2416-D

COMPLETE TITLE: In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings 

Against Jesse Jon Johansen, Attorney at Law:

Office of Lawyer Regulation,

 Complainant,

 v.

Jesse Jon Johansen,

 Respondent.

DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS AGAINST JOHANSEN

OPINION FILED: April 9, 2020

SUBMITTED ON BRIEFS:

ORAL ARGUMENT:

SOURCE OF APPEAL:

COURT:

COUNTY:

JUDGE:

JUSTICES:

CONCURRED:

DISSENTED:

NOT PARTICIPATING: 

ATTORNEYS:
2020 WI 32

NOTICE

This opinion is subject to further 

editing and modification. The final 

version will appear in the bound 

volume of the official reports. 

No. 2018AP2416-D

STATE OF WISCONSIN : IN SUPREME COURT

In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings 

Against Jesse Jon Johansen, Attorney at Law:

Office of Lawyer Regulation,

 Complainant,

 v.

Jesse Jon Johansen,

 Respondent.

FILED

APR 9, 2020

Sheila T. Reiff

Clerk of Supreme Court

ATTORNEY disciplinary proceeding. Attorney's license 

suspended. 

¶1 PER CURIAM. We review the report of Referee Robert E. 

Kinney recommending that the court suspend Attorney Jesse J. 

Johansen's license to practice law in Wisconsin for six months. 

The referee also recommends that Attorney Johansen make 

restitution and that he be ordered to pay the full costs of this 

disciplinary proceeding, which are $5,253.95 as of December 23, 

2019. The referee issued his report after Attorney Johansen and 

the Office of Lawyer Regulation (OLR) entered into a stipulation 

whereby Attorney Johansen admitted to 18 counts of misconduct 
No. 2018AP2416-D 

2

arising out of four client matters. Neither party has appealed 

from the referee's report and recommendation, and we review the 

matter under Supreme Court Rule (SCR) 22.17(2).

¶2 After careful review of the matter, we agree that 

Attorney Johansen's professional misconduct warrants a six-month 

suspension. We also agree that Attorney Johansen should bear the 

full costs of this proceeding and that he should pay restitution.

¶3 Attorney Johansen was admitted to practice law in 

Wisconsin in 2008. His address listed with the State Bar of 

Wisconsin is in Superior, Wisconsin. He has no prior disciplinary 

history.

¶4 On October 9, 2018, Attorney Johansen's license to 

practice law in Wisconsin was suspended pursuant to SCR 22.03(4) 

for his willful failure to cooperate with the OLR's grievance 

investigation. On October 31, 2018, the State Bar of Wisconsin 

suspended Attorney Johansen's law license for failure to pay State 

Bar dues and failure to certify trust account information. On 

June 5, 2019, Attorney Johansen's law license was suspended for 

failure to comply with continuing legal education requirements. 

His law license remains suspended.

¶5 On December 20, 2018, the OLR filed a complaint against 

Attorney Johansen alleging nine counts of misconduct. Attorney 

Johansen did not file an answer to the complaint. The referee was 

appointed on April 1, 2019. 

¶6 On June 27, 2019, the OLR filed an amended complaint 

adding an additional nine counts of misconduct. Attorney Johansen 

did not file an answer to the amended complaint. At a scheduling 
No. 2018AP2416-D 

3

conference in August 2019, Attorney Johansen indicated he would 

not be contesting the allegations contained in the amended 

complaint but that he would be contesting the OLR's request for a 

six-month license suspension, as well as the request for 

restitution on behalf of some of his former clients. 

¶7 At a hearing on October 17, 2019, the parties presented 

a stipulation whereby Attorney Johansen pled no contest to all 18 

counts of misconduct alleged in the amended complaint. 

¶8 The referee issued his report and recommendation on 

December 11, 2019. Based on the stipulated facts in the amended 

complaint, the referee found that there was a factual basis to 

find that the OLR satisfied its burden of proof with respect to 

all of the counts of misconduct alleged in the amended complaint. 

¶9 The first nine counts of misconduct alleged in the 

amended complaint arose out of trust account violations that 

occurred during the course of Attorney Johansen's representation 

of E.K. An overdraft notice from National Bank of Commerce in 

Superior, Wisconsin, concerning Attorney Johansen's trust account 

prompted an OLR investigation. The investigation showed that in 

August 2014, Attorney Johansen began representing E.K. in a 

personal injury case. Attorney Johansen failed to reduce the 

contingent fee agreement to writing.

¶10 On October 4, 2016, there was a zero balance in Attorney 

Johansen's trust account. Attorney Johansen settled E.K.'s case 

for $7,500 but failed to provide E.K. with written notice that the 

funds had been received. Attorney Johansen gave E.K. $1,000. On 

October 5, 2016, Attorney Johansen deposited $6,500 into his trust 
No. 2018AP2416-D 

4

account from the settlement proceeds. The only funds in the trust 

account at that time were attributable to E.K.

¶11 E.K. had instructed Attorney Johansen to remit the net 

proceeds of the settlement to Attorney Richard Gondik after 

Attorney Johansen's fees and costs were paid in order to pay 

attorney fees owed to Attorney Gondik in an unrelated matter. 

Attorney Johansen's one-third contingent fee was $2,500, and he 

claimed an additional $1,250 in costs. Attorney Johansen was 

therefore potentially owed a total of $3,750, leaving net proceeds 

of $2,750 to be paid to Attorney Gondik.

¶12 Between October 6 and October 11, 2016, Attorney 

Johansen made four separate cash withdrawals totaling $3,750 from 

his trust account. Attorney Johansen asserted this payment was 

for his fees and expenses. He maintained no records showing the 

specifics of the withdrawals and failed to maintain any required 

trust account records. 

¶13 Attorney Johansen did not promptly distribute $2,750, or 

any other amount, to Attorney Gondik from the settlement proceeds 

held in trust. On October 17, 2016, Attorney Johansen improperly 

deposited $2,350 of earned fees into his trust account via a check 

from the State of Wisconsin. 

¶14 Between October 17 and October 24, 2016, Attorney 

Johansen made five separate cash withdrawals from his trust account 

totaling $2,100, leaving a balance of $3,000 in the account. 

Attorney Johansen maintained no records showing the specifics of 

those withdrawals. 
No. 2018AP2416-D 

5

¶15 On October 27, 2016, Attorney Johansen improperly made 

a $1,650 cash deposit into the trust account, and then proceeded 

to make four separate cash withdrawals totaling $3,250. As of 

that date, the balance in the trust account was $1,400; the $2,750 

owed to Attorney Gondik had not been paid; and Attorney Johansen 

had drawn down the trust account balance to less than the amount 

that should have been held from the E.K. settlement.

¶16 On November 16, 2016, Attorney Johansen improperly 

deposited additional earned fees via a check from the state public 

defender into his trust account. After receiving cash back, that 

left a trust account balance of $2,550.

¶17 In February 2017, Attorney Johansen gave Attorney Gondik 

a cashier's check for $2,500. The distribution to Attorney Gondik 

should have been made with a trust account check.

¶18 Attorney Johansen did not provide E.K. with a written 

accounting of the final distribution of the settlement proceeds 

from his trust account. 

¶19 On May 31, 2018, the OLR sent Attorney Johansen a letter, 

via first class and certified mail, requesting supplemental 

written information regarding his trust account. The first class 

letter was not returned as undeliverable. The receipt for the 

certified letter was returned to the OLR on June 12, 2018, with an 

illegible signature and was undated. Attorney Johansen failed to 

respond to the OLR's letter.

¶20 The OLR filed a motion with this court requesting that 

Attorney Johansen show cause why his law license should not be 

temporarily suspended for his failure to cooperate in the OLR's 
No. 2018AP2416-D 

6

investigation. Attorney Johansen did not respond. On October 9, 

2018, this court suspended Attorney Johansen's license to practice 

law in Wisconsin. 

¶21 The amended complaint alleged the following counts of 

misconduct with respect to Attorney Johansen's representation of 

E.K. and the trust account violations:

Count 1: By failing to reduce the contingent fee 

agreement with E.K. to writing, Attorney Johansen 

violated SCR 20:1.5(c).1

Count 2: By failing to notify E.K. in writing upon his 

receipt of settlement proceeds from the personal injury 

matter and by failing to promptly disburse funds held in 

trust to Attorney Gondik pursuant to E.K.'s direction, 

in each instance, Attorney Johansen violated SCR 

20:1.15(e)(1).2

 

1 SCR 20:1.5(c) provides: 

A fee may be contingent on the outcome of the matter 

for which the service is rendered, except in a matter in 

which a contingent fee is prohibited by par. (d) or other 

law. A contingent fee agreement shall be in a writing 

signed by the client, and shall state the method by which 

the fee is to be determined, including the percentage or 

percentages that shall accrue to the lawyer in the event 

of settlement, trial or appeal; litigation and other 

expenses to be deducted from the recovery; and whether 

such expenses are to be deducted before or after the 

contingent fee is calculated. The agreement must clearly 

notify the client of any expenses for which the client 

will be liable whether or not the client is the 

prevailing party. Upon conclusion of a contingent fee 

matter, the lawyer shall provide the client with a 

written statement stating the outcome of the matter and 

if there is a recovery, showing the remittance to the 

client and the method of its determination. 

2 SCR 20:1.15(e)(1) provides:
No. 2018AP2416-D 

7

Count 3: By failing to provide E.K. a written accounting 

of funds held in his trust account upon final 

distribution, Attorney Johansen violated 

SCR 20:1.15(e)(2).3

Count 4: By failing to hold in his trust account E.K.'s 

settlement funds which E.K. had directed to be paid to 

attorney Gondik, Attorney Johansen violated SCR

20:1.15(b)(1).4

Count 5: By drawing down his trust account balance below 

the amount he should have been holding from the E.K. 

settlement, Attorney Johansen violated SCR 20:8.4(c).5

 

Upon receiving funds or other property in which a 

client has an interest, or in which the lawyer has 

received notice that a 3rd party has an interest 

identified by a lien, court order, judgment, or 

contract, the lawyer shall promptly notify the client or 

3rd party in writing. Except as stated in this rule or 

otherwise permitted by law or by agreement with the 

client, the lawyer shall promptly deliver to the client 

or 3rd party any funds or other property that the client 

or 3rd party is entitled to receive.

3 SCR 20:1.15(e)(2) provides: "Upon final distribution of 

any trust property or upon request by the client or a 3rd party 

having an ownership interest in the property, the lawyer shall 

promptly render a full written accounting regarding the property."

4 SCR 20:1.15(b)(1) provides: 

A lawyer shall hold in trust, separate from the 

lawyer's own property, that property of clients and 3rd 

parties that is in the lawyer's possession in connection 

with a representation. All funds of clients and 3rd 

parties paid to a lawyer or law firm in connection with 

a representation shall be deposited in one or more 

identifiable trust accounts.

5 SCR 20:8.4(c) provides: "It is professional misconduct for 

a lawyer to engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit 

or misrepresentation."
No. 2018AP2416-D 

8

Count 6: By depositing earned fees into his trust 

account, Attorney Johansen violated SCR 20:1.15(b)(3).6

Count 7: By making cash withdrawals from his trust 

account, Attorney Johansen violated 

SCR 20:1.15(f)(2)(a).7

Count 8: By failing to maintain complete records of 

trust account funds, Attorney Johansen violated 

SCR 20:1.15(g)(1).8

 

6 SCR 20:1.15(b)(3) provides: 

No funds belonging to a lawyer or law firm, except 

funds reasonably sufficient to pay monthly account 

service charges, may be deposited or retained in a trust 

account. Each lawyer or law firm that receives trust 

funds shall maintain at least one draft account, other 

than the trust account, for funds received and disbursed 

other than in a trust capacity, which shall be entitled 

"Business Account," "Office Account," "Operating 

Account," or words of similar import. 

7 SCR 20:1.15(f)(2)(a) provides: "No withdrawal of cash shall 

be made from a trust account or from a deposit to a trust account. 

No check shall be made payable to 'Cash.' No withdrawal shall be 

made from a trust account by automated teller or cash dispensing 

machine."

8 SCR 20:1.15(g)(1) provides: 

A lawyer shall maintain and preserve complete 

records of trust account funds, all deposits and 

disbursements, and other trust property and shall 

preserve those records for at least six years after the 

date of termination of the representation. Electronic 

records shall be backed up by an appropriate storage 

device. The office of lawyer regulation shall publish 

guidelines for trust account record keeping.
No. 2018AP2416-D 

9

Count 9: By willfully failing to respond to the OLR's 

request for additional information, Attorney Johansen 

violated SCR 22.03(6),9 enforceable via SCR 20:8.4(h).10

¶22 The second matter detailed in the OLR's amended 

complaint involved Attorney Johansen's representation of J.J. In 

February 2018, J.J. paid Attorney Johansen an advanced fee of 

$1,500 to represent her in a divorce matter in Douglas County.

¶23 On March 6, 8, and 9, 2018, J.J. sent Attorney Johansen 

text messages asking if the divorce action had been filed and 

asking for information about service. Attorney Johansen failed to 

respond until March 14, 2018. J.J. again texted Attorney Johansen 

about the case on March 14, 15, and 16, 2018. 

¶24 On or about March 19, 2018, J.J. fired Attorney Johansen 

and requested that he return her advanced fee. She renewed her 

request on April 19, 2018. Attorney Johansen did not comply.

¶25 On July 13, 2018, J.J. filed a small claims action 

against Attorney Johansen seeking $1,500 for the advanced fee. 

She obtained a default judgment against him on August 2, 2018. 

The court ordered Attorney Johansen to file a financial disclosure 

statement. He failed to timely do so.

 

9 SCR 22.03(6) provides: "In the course of the investigation, 

the respondent's wilful failure to provide relevant information, 

to answer questions fully, or to furnish documents and the 

respondent's misrepresentation in a disclosure are misconduct, 

regardless of the merits of the matters asserted in the grievance." 

10 SCR 20:8.4(h) provides: "It is professional misconduct for 

a lawyer to fail to cooperate in the investigation of a grievance 

filed with the office of lawyer regulation as required by SCR 

21.15(4), SCR 22.001(9)(b), SCR 22.03(2), SCR 22.03(6), or SCR 

22.04(1)."
No. 2018AP2416-D 

10

¶26 On August 21, 2018, J.J. filed a motion for contempt due 

to Attorney Johansen's failure to file the financial disclosure 

statement. A hearing was held on the motion on September 5, 2018. 

Attorney Johansen failed to appear, was found in contempt, and an 

arrest warrant was issued. Attorney Johansen thereafter filed the 

financial disclosure statement. 

¶27 J.J. filed a grievance against Attorney Johansen with 

the OLR. On December 14, 2018, the OLR sent a letter to Attorney 

Johansen by certified mail requesting a written response to the 

grievance. Attorney Johansen signed the certified mail receipt 

but failed to respond to the request for information.

¶28 The OLR sent Attorney Johansen a second letter 

requesting a response to J.J.'s grievance on January 9, 2019. 

Attorney Johansen did not respond. After learning that Attorney 

Johansen had moved to a new address without notifying the State 

Bar of Wisconsin, the OLR sent a letter to the new address. 

Attorney Johansen did not respond.

¶29 On May 8, 2019, the Wisconsin Lawyers' Fund for Client 

Protection approved payment of $1,500 to J.J.

¶30 The OLR's amended complaint alleged the following counts 

of misconduct with respect to Attorney Johansen's representation 

of J.J.:

Count 10: By failing to refund J.J.'s advanced fee after 

his representation was terminated, Attorney Johansen 

violated SCR 20:1.16(d).11

 

11 SCR 20:1.16(d) provides: 
No. 2018AP2416-D 

11

Count 11: By failing to timely file his financial 

disclosure statement and appear for the contempt hearing 

pursuant to the circuit court's orders, Attorney 

Johansen violated SCR 20:3.4(c).12

Count 12: By willfully failing to provide the OLR a 

response to J.J.'s grievance, Attorney Johansen violated 

SCR 22.03(2)13 and SCR 22.03(6), enforceable via SCR 

20:8.4(h).

¶31 The next client matter detailed in the OLR's amended 

complaint involved Attorney Johansen's representation of N.N. In 

August 2018, E.V. paid Attorney Johansen an advanced fee of $2,000 

to represent N.N., her nephew, in a criminal matter in Douglas 

 

Upon termination of representation, a lawyer shall 

take steps to the extent reasonably practicable to 

protect a client's interests, such as giving reasonable 

notice to the client, allowing time for employment of 

other counsel, surrendering papers and property to which 

the client is entitled and refunding any advance payment 

of fee or expense that has not been earned or incurred. 

The lawyer may retain papers relating to the client to 

the extent permitted by other law.

12 SCR 20:3.4(c) provides: "A lawyer shall not knowingly 

disobey an obligation under the rules of a tribunal, except for an 

open refusal based on an assertion that no valid obligation 

exists."

13 SCR 22.03(2) provides: 

Upon commencing an investigation, the director 

shall notify the respondent of the matter being 

investigated unless in the opinion of the director the 

investigation of the matter requires otherwise. The 

respondent shall fully and fairly disclose all facts and 

circumstances pertaining to the alleged misconduct 

within 20 days after being served by ordinary mail a 

request for a written response. The director may allow 

additional time to respond. Following receipt of the 

response, the director may conduct further investigation 

and may compel the respondent to answer questions, 

furnish documents, and present any information deemed 

relevant to the investigation.
No. 2018AP2416-D 

12

County. Attorney Johansen neither memorialized the terms, scope, 

and fees in a written fee agreement, nor did he communicate the 

purpose and effect of the advanced fee in writing to E.V.

¶32 Attorney Johansen made one appearance in court in N.N.'s 

case on September 24, 2018 for a status conference. On October 9, 

2018, Attorney Johansen's license to practice law in Wisconsin was 

suspended for his willful failure to cooperate with the OLR's 

grievance investigation. Attorney Johansen made no further 

appearances in N.N.'s case.

¶33 In October 2018, Attorney Johansen promised to refund 

the advanced fee to E.V. To date, he has not refunded any portion 

of it.

¶34 In December 2018 and January 2019, the OLR sent Attorney 

Johansen letters asking him to respond to the grievance filed by 

E.V. He failed to respond.

¶35 The amended complaint alleged the following counts of 

misconduct with respect to Attorney Johansen's representation of 

N.N. and retainer by E.V.:

Count 13: By failing to have a written fee agreement 

memorializing the terms, scope, and fees for 

representation, and by failing to communicate in writing 

the purpose and effect of the advanced fee for 

representation in a matter where the total cost of 

representation exceeded $1,000, Attorney Johansen 

violated SCR 20:1.5(b)(1) and SCR 20:1.5(b)(2).14

 

14 SCR 20:1.5(b)(1) and (2) provides:

(1) The scope of the representation and the basis 

or rate of the fee and expenses for which the client 

will be responsible shall be communicated to the client 

in writing, before or within a reasonable time after 
No. 2018AP2416-D 

13

Count 14: By failing to refund any portion of E.V.'s 

advanced fee, Attorney Johansen violated SCR 20:1.16(d).

Count 15: By willfully failing to provide the OLR a 

response to E.V.'s grievance, Attorney Johansen violated 

SCR 22.03(2) and SCR 22.03(6), enforceable via SCR 

20:8.4(h).

¶36 The final matter detailed in the amended complaint 

involved Attorney Johansen's representation of I.G. In August 

2018, I.G. paid Attorney Johansen an advanced fee of $750 to 

represent him in a criminal matter in Douglas County. I.G.'s 

girlfriend paid Attorney Johansen an additional $150 for the 

representation.

¶37 On September 5, 2018, Attorney Johansen appeared in 

court with I.G. for a motion hearing. On October 9, 2018, Attorney 

Johansen's license to practice law in Wisconsin was suspended. 

Attorney Johansen made no further appearances on behalf of I.G.

¶38 Attorney Johansen failed to inform I.G. of his license 

suspension, that he could no longer represent him, and that I.G. 

should seek new counsel. Attorney Johansen did not refund any 

portion of I.G.'s advanced fee.

 

commencing the representation, except when the lawyer 

will charge a regularly represented client on the same 

basis or rate as in the past. If it is reasonably 

foreseeable that the total cost of representation to the 

client, including attorney's fees, will be $1000 or 

less, the communication may be oral or in writing. Any 

changes in the basis or rate of the fee or expenses shall 

also be communicated in writing to the client. 

(2) If the total cost of representation to the 

client, including attorney's fees, is more than $1000, 

the purpose and effect of any retainer or advance fee 

that is paid to the lawyer shall be communicated in 

writing.
No. 2018AP2416-D 

14

¶39 In January and February, 2019, the OLR sent Attorney 

Johansen letters requesting a written response to I.G.'s 

grievance. Attorney Johansen failed to respond.

¶40 The amended complaint alleged the following counts of 

misconduct with respect to Attorney Johansen's representation of 

I.G.:

Count 16: By failing to notify I.G. that his Wisconsin 

law license had been suspended, that he could no longer 

represent him, and that I.G. should seek new counsel, 

Attorney Johansen violated SCR 22.26(1)(a) and (b),15

enforceable via SCR 20:8.4(f).16

Count 17: By failing to refund any portion of I.G.'s 

advanced fee, Attorney Johansen violated SCR 20:1.16(d).

Count 18: By willfully failing to provide the OLR a 

response to I.G.'s grievance, Attorney Johansen violated 

SCR 22.03(2) and SCR 22.03(6), enforceable via SCR 

20:8.4(h).

¶41 In the stipulation, the parties agreed that the issue of 

the appropriate level of discipline to be imposed for Attorney 

 

15 SCR 22.26(1)(a) and (b) provides: 

(1) On or before the effective date of license 

suspension or revocation, an attorney whose license is 

suspended or revoked shall do all of the following:

(a) Notify by certified mail all clients being

represented in pending matters of the suspension or 

revocation and of the attorney's consequent inability to 

act as an attorney following the effective date of the 

suspension or revocation.

(b) Advise the clients to seek legal advice of 

their choice elsewhere.

16 SCR 20:8.4(f) provides: "It is professional misconduct for 

a lawyer to violate a statute, supreme court rule, supreme court 

order or supreme court decision regulating the conduct of lawyers."
No. 2018AP2416-D 

15

Johansen's misconduct would be addressed at a sanction hearing. 

The hearing was held on October 17, 2019. The OLR sought a sixmonth license suspension, which would require Attorney Johansen to 

demonstrate that he is fit to be consulted by others, to represent 

them and to otherwise act in matters of trust and confidence, and 

aid the administration of justice. Attorney Johansen requested a 

shorter suspension.

¶42 The referee concluded that a six-month license 

suspension was appropriate. The referee noted that from early in 

the OLR's investigation, Attorney Johansen showed a pattern of 

failing to respond to the OLR's inquiries, eventually leading to 

the suspension of Attorney Johansen's license to practice law due 

to his non-cooperation.

¶43 The referee noted that at the sanction hearing, Attorney 

Johansen testified he had sustained a back injury while in the 

Marines and had developed an addiction to opioids, which he has 

struggled with for 20 years. The referee noted, however, that 

Attorney Johansen produced no medical or military records and when 

asked if he had ever applied for benefits due to a service related 

disability, he said he had not done so but might explore doing so 

in the future because his back problem was getting worse. 

¶44 The referee noted that Attorney Johansen indicated that 

on two occasions in the summer of 2019 he entered in-patient 

treatment at the Betty Ford Clinic in Minnesota. Attorney Johansen 

also said that he was not currently in any treatment for his 

addiction and when asked if he had any thought about establishing 

a treatment plan in the future he said, "I haven't thought about 
No. 2018AP2416-D 

16

it because it hasn't been an issue, but I suppose I had better 

because it is sometimes a lifetime struggle, and I know I have 

struggled with it for 20 years now."

¶45 The referee said the thrust of Attorney Johansen's 

defense was that, even though he has struggled with opioid 

addiction for 20 years, the referee should ignore that fact because 

none of the 18 counts of misconduct to which he admitted involved 

the purchase or use of illegal substances, nor was there a proven 

nexus between the violations and his drug use.

¶46 The referee also noted that although a number of the 

counts of misconduct involved violations of trust account rules, 

it was not clear whether Attorney Johansen understood the trust 

account rules, and he presented no evidence of attending any 

educational programs regarding trust accounts.

¶47 The referee said while it may be there was no direct 

connection between some of the counts in the amended complaint and 

Attorney Johansen's drug use, Attorney Johansen does admit that 

his lack of cooperation with the OLR's investigation, which is 

itself a violation of supreme court rules, was related to his drug 

abuse. The referee said Attorney Johansen did not appear to 

approach this case in a serious or professional manner; he failed 

to respond to important communications; he missed deadlines; and 

there was no indication he prepared for the sanctions hearing. 

¶48 As to mitigating factors, the referee noted that 

Attorney Johansen has no prior disciplinary record, nor did there 

appear to be a dishonest or selfish motive underlying the 

violations. The referee said although chemical dependency is 
No. 2018AP2416-D 

17

listed as a possible mitigating factor under the American Bar 

Association guidelines, not enough time has transpired to conclude 

that Attorney Johansen has been successfully rehabilitated from 

his drug dependency given that he left treatment early on two 

occasions; failed to provide discharge summaries; failed to 

provide documentary evidence attesting to his present non-drug 

use; and failed to involve himself in follow-up treatment.

¶49 The referee said that this case calls out for a showing 

that Attorney Johansen is fit to be consulted by others, to 

represent them and to otherwise act in matters of trust and 

confidence, and to aid the administration of justice, which 

requires him to go through a formal reinstatement proceeding. The 

referee found this case somewhat similar to In re Disciplinary 

Proceedings Against Danielson, 2006 WI 33, 290 Wis. 2d 12, 712 

N.W.2d 671 and In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against Joset, 2008 

WI 41, 309 Wis. 2d 5, 748 N.W.2d 778. The referee noted both of 

those cases involved attorneys who abandoned their clients. 

Neither had prior discipline and the law licenses of both were 

suspended for six months.

¶50 The referee also recommended that Attorney Johansen be 

ordered to pay restitution of $250 to Attorney Richard Gondik; 

$1,500 to the Wisconsin Lawyers' Fund for Client Protection in the 

J.J. matter; $2,000 to E.V.; and $900 to I.G. In addition, the 

referee recommended that Attorney Johansen pay the full costs of 

this proceeding.

¶51 We will affirm a referee's findings of fact unless they 

are clearly erroneous. Conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. 
No. 2018AP2416-D 

18

See In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against Eisenberg, 2004 WI 14, 

¶5, 269 Wis. 2d 43, 675 N.W.2d 747. We may impose whatever 

sanction we see fit, regardless of the referee's recommendation. 

See In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against Widule, 2003 WI 34, 

¶44, 261 Wis. 2d 45, 660 N.W.2d 686.

¶52 As noted, Attorney Johansen stipulated to all of the 

counts of misconduct. There is no showing that any of the 

referee's findings of fact, based on that stipulation, are clearly 

erroneous. Accordingly, we adopt them. We also agree with the 

referee's legal conclusions that Attorney Johansen violated all of 

the Supreme Court Rules noted above. 

¶53 Turning to the issue of the appropriate sanction, we 

agree with the referee's conclusion that a six-month suspension is 

appropriate. Although no two cases are precisely the same, we do 

find Joset and Danielson to be somewhat analogous. As is our 

normal practice, we find it appropriate to impose the full costs 

of this proceeding on Attorney Johansen. We also find it 

appropriate to order Attorney Johansen to pay restitution in the 

amounts sought by the OLR.

¶54 IT IS ORDERED that the license of Jesse J. Johansen to 

practice law in Wisconsin is suspended for a period of six months, 

effective the date of this order. 

¶55 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that within 60 days of the date of 

this order, Jesse J. Johansen shall pay restitution as follows: 

$250 to Attorney Richard Gondik; $1,500 to the Wisconsin Lawyers' 

Fund for Client Protection in the J.J. matter; $2,000 to E.V.; and 

$900 to I.G.
No. 2018AP2416-D 

19

¶56 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that within 60 days of the date of 

this order, Jesse J. Johansen shall pay to the Office of Lawyer 

Regulation, the costs of this proceeding, which are $5,253.95 as 

of December 23, 2019.

¶57 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that restitution specified above 

is to be completed prior to paying costs to the Office of Lawyer 

Regulation.

¶58 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, that to the extent that he has 

not already done so, Jesse J. Johansen shall comply with the 

provisions of SCR 22.26 regarding the duties of a person whose 

license to practice law in Wisconsin has been suspended.

¶59 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the temporary suspension of 

Jesse J. Johansen's license to practice law, entered on October 9, 

2018, is hereby lifted.

¶60 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the administrative suspension 

of Jesse J. Johansen's license to practice law in Wisconsin, due 

to his failure to pay mandatory bar dues, for failure to file 

Office of Lawyer Regulation trust account certification, and for 

noncompliance with continuing legal education requirements, will 

remain in effect until each reason for the administrative 

suspension has been rectified pursuant to SCR 22.28(1).

¶61 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that compliance with all 

conditions of this order is required for reinstatement. See

SCR 22.28(3).
No. 2018AP2416-D 

1