Title: OLR v. Jesse Jon Johansen
Citation: N/A
Docket Number: 2018AP002416-D
State: Wisconsin
Issuer: Wisconsin Supreme Court
Date: April 9, 2020

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 six-
month 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