A New York court has accepted the resignation of attorney Daniel John Matheson, who sought to leave the bar for nondisciplinary reasons. This decision affects Matheson, who has been a member of the New York bar since 2006, and it underscores the process for attorneys wishing to resign without facing disciplinary actions.
The Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York issued its ruling on September 3, 2026, in the case titled Matter of Matheson, docket number PM-192-26. The court's decision is significant as it clarifies the procedure for attorneys seeking to resign voluntarily, emphasizing that such resignations can occur without any disciplinary implications.
Background
Daniel John Matheson, who has been practicing law since 2006, submitted an application to resign from the New York bar. His request was not due to any disciplinary actions or misconduct. Instead, Matheson sought to leave the bar for personal reasons, which he detailed in an affidavit submitted to the court.
The Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department reviewed Matheson's application and indicated that it did not oppose his resignation. This support from the committee played a crucial role in the court's decision to grant Matheson's request.
The Ruling
The court ruled in favor of Matheson's application, stating, “we grant his application and accept his resignation.” The ruling was issued by a panel of judges including Pritzker, J.P., Ceresia, Powers, Corcoran, and Ryba. The judges noted that Matheson is eligible to resign for nondisciplinary reasons, which allowed them to accept his resignation.
In its order, the court also mandated that Matheson's name be removed from the roll of attorneys in New York. The judges instructed Matheson to cease practicing law in any capacity within the state. They stated, “Matheson is hereby forbidden to appear as an attorney or counselor-at-law before any court, judge, justice, board, commission or other public authority.”
Impact
This ruling sets a clear precedent for other attorneys considering resignation from the bar in New York. It highlights that attorneys can resign for personal reasons without facing disciplinary actions, provided they follow the proper procedures. The decision reinforces the importance of the Attorney Grievance Committee's role in reviewing such applications.
Going forward, this ruling may encourage other attorneys who wish to resign without disciplinary issues to pursue similar applications. It clarifies the process and assures them that they can do so without fear of negative repercussions on their professional record.
What’s Next
Details were not available in the court filing regarding whether Matheson plans to appeal this decision. However, since the resignation was accepted without any disciplinary action, it is unlikely that there will be further legal proceedings related to this case.