In the Matter of Matthew Jason Anderson

Matthew Jason Anderson, a Georgia lawyer since 2019, represented several clients in personal injury cases and got settlements on their behalf. In four separate cases, he failed to pay medical providers who were owed money from those settlements, and in one case he also failed to give his client the money she was due. He ignored clients' requests for updates, did not keep a proper trust account for client funds, and in one case falsely told a client, and later falsely told the State Bar in a sworn statement, that he had paid her medical bills. Anderson was suspended for not responding to the Bar's investigation, and he never contested the Bar's Notice of Discipline seeking his disbarment, so the facts against him were treated as admitted. The Supreme Court of Georgia reviewed the allegations and the standards it uses for attorney discipline and decided that disbarment, the removal of his license to practice law in Georgia, was the right punishment.

The court held that Anderson's admitted violations, including failing to pay clients and medical providers from settlement funds, lacking a proper trust account, and lying to a client and the Bar, warranted disbarment as the presumptive and appropriate sanction given the knowing misconduct, serious injury caused, and multiple aggravating factors with no mitigation.

The ruling protects Georgia clients and medical providers who rely on lawyers to properly handle settlement money, and it removes a lawyer who mishandled client funds and lied about it from practicing in the state, reinforcing trust-account and honesty rules for the profession.

Disbarred

1. Because Anderson did not timely reject the Bar's Notice of Discipline, he was in default under State Bar rules, meaning the facts alleged against him were treated as admitted without any hearing.
2. The court applied the American Bar Association's Standards for Imposing Lawyer Sanctions, which direct it to weigh the duty violated, the lawyer's mental state, the harm caused, and any aggravating or mitigating factors.
3. Applying that framework, the court found Anderson knowingly and intentionally violated duties owed to his clients, third-party medical providers, the public, and the legal profession, causing real financial harm to clients and providers.
4. The court found several aggravating factors, including a dishonest motive, a repeated pattern of misconduct across four cases, obstruction of the Bar's investigation, false statements to the Bar, vulnerable clients, and no effort at restitution, with no mitigating factors present.
5. Because these violations and aggravating circumstances matched the presumptive sanction of disbarment and were consistent with how the court had punished similar misconduct in prior cases, the court concluded disbarment was the appropriate discipline.

• attorney disbarment
• settlement funds
• trust account violations
• State Bar grievance
• personal injury settlements