Office of Chief Disciplinary Counsel v.Vaccaro

Syllabus

The petitioner, the Office of Chief Disciplinary Counsel, appealed from the trial court's judgment ordering certain funds to be disbursed to the respon- dent attorney from a clients' fund account he established pursuant to rule 1.15 of the Rules of Professional Conduct (IOLTA account) following an audit of that account by the Statewide Grievance Committee. The petitioner claimed, inter alia, that the court erred in determining that there was suffi- cient evidence in the record to support its conclusion that the funds at issue were fees earned by the respondent and should be returned to him. Held: The trial court erred in ordering that the funds at issue in the respondent attorney's IOLTA account were fees earned by the respondent, as the record was devoid of any such evidence, and, therefore, the respondent failed to meet his burden of demonstrating that he was entitled to those funds, the court having relied on certain testimony that amounted to speculation, leaving this court with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake had been made. The trial court erred when it rejected the petitioner's argument that the funds at issue should escheat to the state pursuant to the statute (§ 3-61a) governing abandoned property held by a fiduciary, as there was no evidence presented to prove that the funds belonged to the respondent attorney, and, thus, they were presumed to belong to the respondent's clients or third parties and necessarily were held in a fiduciary capacity pursuant to rule 1.15 of the Rules of Professional Conduct. Argued September 3—officially released October 28, 2025