PUBLIC STATE BAR COURT OF CALIFORNIA HEARING DEPARTMENT ~1.08 ANGELES Inthe Mater of Case Nose 13-0-15588.D EM, d (1340-14282), 13.0-170%4 (Cons) SVITLANA E, SANGARY, ) ) DECISION ‘Member No, 232282, ) ) A Member ofthe State Ba. INTRODUCTION Respondent Svitlana Ii, Sangary (Respondent) is charged here with four counts of ‘misconduct, involving thre separate matters. Iti lloped that Respondent willl volute rule !-409(D)2) of the Rules of Professional Conduct! (doceptive advertising); ele 3-700(DX) (Gung to promptly eecse a cient file) nd two counts of seetion 6068, subdivision () ing tocooperate with a disciplinary invosgaton), The State Bas hid the burden of proving the ove charges by clear and convincing evidenee. The cour finds culpability end reoranerds iseiptine asset forth below. PERTIVENT PROCEDURAL HISTORY ‘The Otfice ofthe Chief Trial Counsel ofthe State Bar of Caliomia (State Ber initiated this proceeding by filing « Notice of Diseiptnary Charges (NDC) on November 2, 2013, in ese Nos. 13-0-13838 and 13-0-14282, On January 1, 2014, «statu cosference was ld in this * Uniess otherwise indicated, all references to rules refer tothe State ar Rules uf Professional Conduct. Furthermore, all satutory references are io the Business and Professions Code, uns ‘otherwise indicated. “1rater. ‘The State Bar was represented by Eli Morgenstesa, Resporident did not agpesr. Because the court had not reesived a response by Respondent to the NDC. the State Bar was ordered to file a motion for catty of Kespondent’s dafaul: by February 14, 2014, in the event that “a response wa not filed, (On January 27,2014, Respondent, acting as her own counsel, filed a reponse to the NDC. In her response, Respondent denied the allogstions contained inthe NDC and thea wrote 4 16-page soliloquy with litte to no rational connection to the cuarges at hand. In one pertion of ber response, Respondent wrote: Also, with regard to false statements and misleading advertisement, none ot than Natale Portman comes to mind. ‘The online medi extensively covers the consoversysunounding Natale Porman's performance inthe fil Black Swan. ‘The ballet dancer wh performed inthe Black Swan, Serdh Lane has come forward torovel [sc] « “coverup” and say that Natalie Portman’ head was superimposed on to Seta Lancs bey, and that Natale Portman lied. Please sce Exibit (sie) 2, 3 articles that appeared on sw shepsardan.com, bap /aewscofipedingom sm ‘wu shehuffingtonpostcom, Despite the foregoing, Netalie Portman has won an Osear for her performance in Black Swan, [Respondent's January 27, 2014 response, p12. Later in her response, Respondent concluded by stating ‘There is a ropular expression, ‘sweet sixteon’. The foregoing 16 pages can te chatacterived as biter-sweet sixooo, in SANGARY’s view. It gocs without saying as to why they ate bitter. Can one envision the acts in the civil arena, more unscerly than the ones described above? But what SANGARY wiews as sweet i that this ‘country, the United States of America, is truly the land of ‘opportunity, where anything and everything is possible, SVITLANA SANGARY cane to this country in her twenties, with nothing, and married another iramigret, who also had nothing, SANGARY passed LSAT [sie} without taking the preparation ‘course, graduated cum laude frum the Pepperdine University ‘School of Law, and passed the bar without even taking the Barbri course. SANGARY’s American dream has come trie, as she has been able to achieve a point wherein now, inher thirties,‘SANGARY is a prominent donor and philantropist, supporting Important social causes, who had recently ecsived the email Sota President Obama, with the subject line‘ need your help today’, asking SVITLANA SANGARY for an additional donation. Pleeso sve Exhibit 30 (God Bless America! (Respondent's Jansary 27,2014 response. 17] Respondent attache 30 exhibits to her response, inching an extensive write-up on [Neale Porunan an an email fom Barack bana requesting that Respondent “chip $3 or ‘more to help the Democratic Party. (Respondents January 27, 2014 response, Lshibit 30.) On January 28,2014, this cout esd wasting oder, sting a tril date of March 12,2014 On March 6, 2014, tis cour issued an oder staying the prosedingbesed onthe Stee Bar's punt ofan interim appeal rezarng portions ofthis cous cas menagenat oder, Ou ‘March 26, 2014, the Review Departament ruled on the State Bars interim appeal and the matise ‘nis remiaied (0 this court with instructions to modify the case ranagement order. (On Apuil 1S, 2014, this court issued an order lfing the existing stay and scheduling x ‘status conference on May 5,201, forthe purpose of setting new trial and pretrial dates. Thet status confereace went forward as scheduled. Pospondent did not appear a the status >onforeeo; estou, Frank Lincoln mad uspecil appearance ue tall Ase satus conference, new tril dat 9 Jane 10,2014 was scheduled On May 6, 2014, his court issued an ord setting forth he mw rl dat, together wit deadlines forthe paris to comply with their pre obligatons ad to file a prostate {n edition, the cout ordered the partes to pricipate in astsment confeerue wits Iudge Foo tem George Scott on May 19,2014. A copy ofthat onézr wes uid wo bh Respondent edo attomey Frank Lincoin,