In re Dasent

Summary

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court affirmed a single justice’s judgment disbarring Carlton J. Dasent. The court held that the hearing committee’s credibility determination and findings that Dasent intentionally misused client funds were supported by substantial evidence, even though the client’s testimony was not independently corroborated. The court also concluded that disbarment was the presumptive sanction given the intentional misuse of client funds, multiple ethical violations, and absence of special mitigating factors.

Holdings

1. A hearing committee may credit uncorroborated testimony, and its reliance on that testimony does not render the evidence supporting its disciplinary findings insubstantial.
2. The hearing committee is the sole judge of witness credibility, and its credibility findings must receive due respect and may not be rejected unless they are wholly inconsistent with another implicit finding.
3. Disbarment is the usual and presumptive sanction when an attorney intentionally misuses client funds and fails to pay the client all funds due, particularly where multiple ethical violations are present and no special mitigating factors exist.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the hearing committee's finding that Dasent intentionally misused client funds with resulting actual deprivation was supported by substantial evidence despite relying on uncorroborated client testimony.
2. Whether reliance on a credibility determination unsupported by independent corroborating evidence violated due process.
3. Whether disbarment was appropriate where Dasent intentionally misused client funds, failed to pay his client all funds due, committed multiple ethical violations, and offered community service and pro bono work as mitigating factors.

Disposition

affirmed