State Bar Court of California

Hearing Department

STIPULATION RE FACTS, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DISPOSITION AND ORDER APPROVING

REPROVAL

Case Number(s): 12-O-16695

In the Matter of: JACQUELINE ANN MANGUM, Bar # 114066, A Member of the State Bar of California, (Respondent).

Counsel For The State Bar: Timothy G. Byer, Bar #172472,

Counsel for Respondent: Jacqueline A. Mangum, Bar #114066,

Submitted to: Assigned Judge.

Filed: November 27, 2013.

  <<not>> checked. PREVIOUS STIPULATION REJECTED

Note:  All information required by this form and any additional information which cannot be provided in the space provided, must be set forth in an attachment to this stipulation under specific headings, e.g., "Facts," "Dismissals," "Conclusions of Law," "Supporting Authority," etc.

A. Parties' Acknowledgments:

1. Respondent is a member of the State Bar of California, admitted July 16, 1984.

2. The parties agree to be bound by the factual stipulations contained herein even if conclusions of law or disposition are rejected or changed by the Supreme Court.

3. All investigations or proceedings listed by case number in the caption of this stipulation are entirely resolved by this stipulation and are deemed consolidated. Dismissed charge(s)/count(s) are listed under "Dismissals."  The stipulation consists of  pages, not including the order.

4. A statement of acts or omissions acknowledged by Respondent as cause or causes for discipline is included under "Facts."

5. Conclusions of law, drawn from and specifically referring to the facts are also included under "Conclusions of Law".

6. The parties must include supporting authority for the recommended level of discipline under the heading "Supporting Authority."

7. No more than 30 days prior to the filing of this stipulation, Respondent has been advised in writing of any pending investigation/proceeding not resolved by this stipulation, except for criminal investigations.

8. Payment of Disciplinary Costs-Respondent acknowledges the provisions of Bus. & Prof. Code §§6086.10 & 6140.7. (Check one option only):

<<not>> checked. Costs are added to membership fee for calendar year following effective date of discipline (public reproval).

<<not>> checked. Case ineligible for costs (private reproval).

checked. Costs are to be paid in equal amounts prior to February 1 for the following membership years: three billing cycles following the effective date of discipline. (Hardship, special circumstances or other good cause per rule 5.132, Rules of Procedure.)  If Respondent fails to pay any installment as described above, or as may be modified by the State Bar Court, the remaining balance is due and payable immediately.

<<not>> checked. Costs are waived in part as set forth in a separate attachment entitled "Partial Waiver of Costs".

<<not>> checked. Costs are entirely waived.

9. The parties understand that:

<<not>> checked.  (a) A private reproval imposed on a respondent as a result of a stipulation approved by the Court prior to initiation of a State Bar Court proceeding is part of the respondent’s official State Bar membership records, but is not disclosed in response to public inquiries and is not reported on the State Bar’s web page. The record of the proceeding in which such a private reproval was imposed is not available to the public except as part of the record of any subsequent proceeding in which it is introduced as evidence of a prior record of discipline under the Rules of Procedure of the State Bar.

<<not>> checked. (b) A private reproval imposed on a respondent after initiation of a State Bar Court proceeding is part of the respondent’s official State Bar Membership records, is disclosed in response to public inquiries and is reported as a record of public discipline on the State Bar’s web page.

checked. (c) A public reproval imposed on a respondent is publicly available as part of the respondent’s official State Bar membership records, is disclosed in response to public inquiries and is reported as a record of public discipline on the State Bar’s web page.

B.     Aggravating Circumstances [for definition, see Standards for Attorney Sanctions for Professional Misconduct, standard 1.2(b)]. Facts supporting aggravating circumstances are required.

checked. (1)            Prior record of discipline [see standard 1.2(f)].

checked. (a)                  State Bar Court case # of prior case 01-O-04861. See Attachment, page 7, "Aggravating Circumstances."

checked. (b)                  Date prior discipline effective December 6, 2003.

checked. (c)                  Rules of Professional Conduct/ State Bar Act violations: rule 3-110(A)(failure to perform with competence)

<<not>> checked. (d)    Degree of prior discipline  

<<not>> checked. (e)    If Respondent has two or more incidents of prior discipline, use space provided below or a separate attachment entitled “Prior Discipline. .

<<not>> checked. (2) Dishonesty:  Respondent's misconduct was surrounded by or followed by bad faith, dishonesty, concealment, overreaching or other violations of the State Bar Act or Rules of Professional Conduct. 

<<not>> checked. (3) Trust Violation:  Trust funds or property were involved and Respondent refused or was unable to account to the client or person who was the object of the misconduct for improper conduct toward said funds or property.

<<not>> checked. (4) Harm:  Respondent's misconduct harmed significantly a client, the public or the administration of justice.

<<not>> checked. (5) Indifference:  Respondent demonstrated indifference toward rectification of or atonement for the consequences of his or her misconduct.

<<not>> checked. (6) Lack of Cooperation:  Respondent displayed a lack of candor and cooperation to victims of his/her misconduct or to the State Bar during disciplinary investigation or proceedings. 

<<not>> checked. (7) Multiple/Pattern of Misconduct:  Respondent's current misconduct evidences multiple acts of wrongdoing or demonstrates a pattern of misconduct.

<<not>> checked. (8) No aggravating circumstances are involved.

Additional aggravating circumstances: .

C. Mitigating Circumstances [see standard 1.2(e)]. Facts supporting mitigating circumstances are required.

<<not>> checked. (1) No Prior Discipline:  Respondent has no prior record of discipline over many years of practice coupled with present misconduct which is not deemed serious.

<<not>> checked. (2) No Harm:  Respondent did not harm the client or person who was the object of the misconduct. 

<<not>> checked. (3) Candor/Cooperation:  Respondent displayed spontaneous candor and cooperation with the victims of his/her misconduct and to the State Bar during disciplinary investigation and proceedings. 

<<not>> checked. (4) Remorse:  Respondent promptly took objective steps spontaneously demonstrating remorse and recognition of the wrongdoing, which steps were designed to timely atone for any consequences of his/her misconduct. 

<<not>> checked. (5) Restitution:  Respondent paid $  on  in restitution to  without the threat or force of disciplinary, civil or criminal proceedings.

<<not>> checked. (6) Delay:  These disciplinary proceedings were excessively delayed.  The delay is not attributable to Respondent and the delay prejudiced him/her.

<<not>> checked. (7) Good Faith:  Respondent acted in good faith.

<<not>> checked. (8) Emotional/Physical Difficulties:  At the time of the stipulated act or acts of professional misconduct Respondent suffered extreme emotional difficulties or physical disabilities which expert testimony would establish was directly responsible for the misconduct.  The difficulties or disabilities were not the product of any illegal conduct by the member, such as illegal drug or substance abuse, and Respondent no longer suffers from such difficulties or disabilities.

<<not>> checked. (9) Severe Financial Stress:  At the time of the misconduct, Respondent suffered from severe financial stress which resulted from circumstances not reasonably foreseeable or which were beyond his/her control and which were directly responsible for the misconduct.

<<not>> checked. (10) Family Problems:  At the time of the misconduct, Respondent suffered extreme difficulties in his/her personal life which were other than emotional or physical in nature.

<<not>> checked. (11) Good Character:  Respondent's good character is attested to by a wide range of references in the legal and general communities who are aware of the full extent of his/her misconduct.

<<not>> checked. (12) Rehabilitation:  Considerable time has passed since the acts of professional misconduct occurred followed by convincing proof of subsequent rehabilitation.

<<not>> checked. (13) No mitigating circumstances are involved.

Additional mitigating circumstances: Pretrial stipulation. See Attachment, page 8, "Mitigating Circumstances."

Emotional/Physical Difficulties: See Attachment, page 8," Mitigating Circumstances."

D. Discipline:

<<not>> checked. (1)  Private reproval (check applicable conditions, if any, below):

<<not>> checked. (a) Approved by the Court prior to initiation of the State Bar Court proceedings (no public disclosure).

<<not>> checked. (b)Approved by the Court after initiation of the State Bar Court proceedings (public disclosure).

or

checked. (2)                Public reproval (Check applicable conditions, if any below)

E. Additional Conditions of Reproval:

checked. (1)            Respondent must comply with the conditions attached to the reproval for a period of .

checked. (2)            During the condition period attached to the reproval, Respondent must comply with the provisions of the State Bar Act and Rules of Professional Conduct.

checked. (3)            Within ten (10) days of any change, Respondent must report to the Membership Records Office of the State Bar and to the Office of Probation of the State Bar of California ("Office of Probation"), all changes of information, including current office address and telephone number, or other address for State Bar purposes, as prescribed by section 6002.1 of the Business and Professions Code.

checked. (4)            Within thirty (30) days from the effective date of discipline, Respondent must contact the Office of Probation and schedule a meeting with Respondent's assigned probation deputy to discuss these terms and conditions of probation. Upon the direction of the Office of Probation, Respondent must meet with the probation deputy either in-person or by telephone. During the period of probation, Respondent must promptly meet with the probation deputy as directed and upon request.

checked. (5)            Respondent must submit written quarterly reports to the Office of Probation on each January 10, April 10, July 10, and October 10 of the period of probation. Under penalty of perjury, Respondent must state whether Respondent has complied with the State Bar Act, the Rules of Professional Conduct, and all conditions of probation during the preceding calendar quarter. Respondent must also state whether there are any proceedings pending against him or her in the State Bar Court and if so, the case number and current status of that proceeding. If the first report would cover less than 30 days, that report must be submitted on the next quarter date, and cover the extended period.
In addition to all quarterly reports, a final report, containing the same information, is due no earlier than twenty (20) days before the last day of the period of probation and no later than the last day of the condition period.

<<not>> checked. (6) Respondent must be assigned a probation monitor. Respondent must promptly review the terms and conditions of probation with the probation monitor to establish a manner and schedule of compliance. During the period of probation, Respondent must furnish such reports as may be requested, in addition to the quarterly reports required to be submitted to the Office of Probation. Respondent must cooperate fully with the monitor.

checked. (7)            Subject to assertion of applicable privileges, Respondent must answer fully, promptly and truthfully any inquiries of the Office of Probation and any probation monitor assigned under these conditions which are directed to Respondent personally or in writing relating to whether Respondent is complying or has complied with the conditions attached to the reproval.

checked. (8)            Within one (1) year of the effective date of the discipline herein, Respondent must provide to the Office of Probation satisfactory proof of attendance at a session of the State Bar Ethics School, and passage of the test given at the end of that session.
<<not>> checked. No Ethics School recommended.  Reason: .

<<not>> checked. (9) Respondent must comply with all conditions of probation imposed in the underlying criminal matter and must so declare under penalty of perjury in conjunction with any quarterly report to be filed with the Office of Probation.

checked. (10) Respondent must provide proof of passage of the Multistate Professional Responsibility Examination ("MPRE"), administered by the National Conference of Bar Examiners, to the Office of Probation within one year of the effective date of the reproval.
<<not>> checked. No MPRE recommended.  Reason: .

checked. (11) The following conditions are attached hereto and incorporated:

<<not>> checked. Substance Abuse Conditions.

<<not>> checked. Law Office Management Conditions.

checked. Medical Conditions.

<<not>> checked. Financial Conditions.

F. Other Conditions Negotiated by the Parties:

Attachment language (if any):.

MEDICAL CONDITIONS

Case Number(s): 12-O-16695

In the Matter of: JACQUELINE ANN MANGUM

<<not>> checked. a. Unless Respondent has been terminated from the Lawyer Assistance Program (“LAP”) prior to respondent’s successful completion of the LAP, respondent must comply with all provisions and conditions of respondent’s Participation Agreement with the LAP and must provide an appropriate waiver authorizing the LAP to provide the Office of Probation and this court with information regarding the terms and conditions of respondent’s participation in the LAP and respondent’s compliance or non-compliance with LAP requirements. Revocation of the written waiver for release of LAP information is a violation of this condition. However, if respondent has successfully completed the LAP, respondent need not comply with this condition.

<<not>> checked. b. Respondent must obtain psychiatric or psychological help/treatment from a duly licensed psychiatrist, psychologist, or clinical social worker at respondent’s own expense a minimum of  times per month and must furnish evidence to the Office of Probation that respondent is so complying with each quarterly report. Help/treatment should commence immediately, and in any event, no later than thirty (30) days after the effective date of the discipline in this matter. Treatment must continue for  days or  months or  years or, the period of probation or until a motion to modify this condition is granted and that ruling becomes final.

If the treating psychiatrist, psychologist, or clinical social worker determines that there has been a substantial change in respondent’s condition, respondent or Office of the Chief Trial Counsel may file a motion for modification of this condition with the Hearing Department of the State Bar Court, pursuant to rule 5.300 of the Rules of Procedure of the State Bar. The motion must be supported by a written statement from the psychiatrist, psychologist, or clinical social worker, by affidavit or under penalty of perjury, in support of the proposed modification.

checked. c. Upon the request of the Office of Probation, respondent must provide the Office of Probation with medical waivers and access to all of respondent’s medical records. Revocation of any medical waiver is a violation of this condition. Any medical records obtained by the Office of Probation are confidential and no information concerning them or their contents will be given to anyone except members of the Office of Probation, Office of the Chief Trial Counsel, and the State Bar Court, who are directly involved with maintaining, enforcing or adjudicating this condition.

Other:  Respondent has been under the care of Dr. Robert P. Chang, M.D. ("the physician") for depression since June 17, 2013. Respondent must obtain treatment from the physician at Respondent’s own expense.

Respondent has selected the physician for the purpose of submitting to an evaluation and treatment. The physician will determine the course of treatment including how many times per month Respondent is to obtain treatment. Respondent must comply with the treatment recommended by the physician and must furnish evidence to the Office of Probation that Respondent is so complying with each quarterly report. Help/treatment should commence and/or continue immediately, and in any event, no later than thirty (30) days after the effective date of the discipline in this matter. Treatment must continue as required by the physician for the period of probation or until a motion to modify this condition is granted and that ruling becomes final. Within 45 days of signing this stipulation, Respondent shall provide a complete copy of this stipulation to the physician. Within 30 days of the effective date of the discipline in this matter, Respondent shall provide to the Office of Probation an original, signed declaration from the physician acknowledging receipt of a complete copy of this stipulation.

Within 45 days of signing this stipulation, Respondent shall execute all necessary waivers of confidentiality with the physician.

Within 30 days of the effective date of the discipline in this matter, Respondent shall provide to the Office of Probation a copy of the waiver provided to the physician. Also within 30 days of the effective date of the discipline in this matter, Respondent shall provide to the Office of Probation an original, signed declaration from the physician acknowledging receipt of the waiver.

Within 30 days of the effective date of the discipline in this matter, Respondent is to undergo an Evaluation with the physician. The Evaluation will be for the purposes of (a) determining whether Respondent has a current psychological diagnosis, (b) setting treatment conditions Respondent is to undertake as a result of the Evaluation, if any, and (c) obtaining a written report from the physician. Respondent shall bear all costs of the Evaluation, the resulting report, and any treatment conditions recommended by the physician. Respondent understands that his treatment conditions may change if the physician deems it necessary, and that he is to bear the cost of such treatment, which in some cases could include in-patient treatment. Respondent understands that (a) the treatment conditions, if any, shall become part of his probation conditions, (b) he must provide the Office of Probation with any proof of treatment compliance or waiver requested by the Office of Probation, and (c) any violation of the treatment conditions is a violation of the probation conditions.

Within 60 days of the effective date of the discipline in this matter, Respondent is to provide a copy of the physician’s written report to the Office of Probation. If the physician requires additional information in order to propose treatment conditions, including, but not limited to, interviewing third parties, Respondent will make good faith efforts to timely provide the additional information. Respondent will provide proof such good faith efforts to the Office of Probation within 10 days of any request.

Within 10 days of any change in treatment conditions, Respondent is to provide written notice to the Office of Probation specifically setting forth the changes. With that written notice, Respondent is to provide an original, signed declaration from the physician acknowledging receipt of the written notice and agreement with its accuracy.

Respondent shall report compliance with the treatment conditions by statement under penalty of perjury in each written quarterly report to the Office of Probation required pursuant to the discipline in this matter.

Respondent shall have his physician submit to the Office of Probation an original, signed declaration that Respondent is in compliance with the treatment conditions by each January 10, April 10, July 10, and October 10 covered by this discipline. Respondent understands that the declarations and reports may be shared with the Office of the Chief Trial Counsel and the State Bar Court.

Respondent understands that treatment conditions associated with other issues or entities may not satisfy treatment conditions required by this section.

If treatment providers are added or changed, Respondent must notify the Office of Probation of the name, address, and telephone number of all such treatment providers within ten days of the retaining of each one. Within 30 days of retaining each such treatment provider, Respondent must provide to the Office of Probation an original signed declaration from the treatment provider stating that it received a complete copy of this stipulation. Also within 30 days of retaining each such treatment provider, Respondent must provide to the Office of Probation an executed waiver of confidentiality as well as an original, signed declaration from the treatment providers acknowledging receipt of the waiver.

If the treating physician determines that that there has been a substantial change in Respondent’s condition, Respondent or the Office of the Chief Trial Counsel may file a motion for modification of this condition with the Heating Department of the State Bar Court, pursuant to rule 5.300 of the Rules of Procedure of the State Bar. The motion must be supported by a written statement from the physician by affidavit under penalty of perjury, in support of the proposed modification.

ATTACHMENT TO

STIPULATION RE FACTS, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DISPOSITION

IN THE MATTER OF: JACQUELINE ANN MANGUM, State Bar No. 114066

STATE BAR COURT CASE NUMBER: 12-O-16695

FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW.

Respondent admits that the following facts are true and that she is culpable of violations of the specified statutes and/or Rules of Professional Conduct.

Case No. 12-O-16695 (Complainant: Robert Kay)

FACTS:

1. On July 25, 2012, Respondent’s client, Robert Kay submitted a complaint alleging the commission of professional misconduct against Respondent to the State Bar of California. On November 1, 2012, and December 4, 2012, a State Bar investigator mailed letters to Respondent, which she received, requesting a written response to the allegations of misconduct under investigation raised by Mr. Kay’s complaint, by November 15, 2012, and December 18, 2012, respectively. Respondent did not respond to the investigator’s letters, or otherwise cooperate in the State Bar’s investigation.

2. The State Bar’s investigation into the allegations raised by Mr. Kay did not lead to sufficient evidence to warrant prosecution of the alleged misconduct.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:

3. By not responding to the State Bar investigator’s letters, Respondent failed to cooperate and participate in a disciplinary investigation pending against Respondent, in willful violation of Business and Professions Code, section 6068(i).

AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES.

Prior Record of Discipline (Std. 1.2(b)(i)): Respondent has been a member of the State Bar since July 16, 1984, and has been disciplined on one prior occasion.

On November 21, 2003, the State Bar Court ordered that Respondent be privately reproved in case no. 01-O-04861, after she stipulated to a single failure to perform in a wrongful termination matter which led to the dismissal of the matter for failure to prosecute in January of 2001.

MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES.

Pre-trial Stipulation: Respondent is entitled to mitigation for entering into a full stipulation with the Office of Chief Trial Counsel prior to trial, thereby saving State Bar Court time and resources. (In the Matter of Downey (Review Dept. 2009) 5 Cal. State Bar Ct. Rptr. 151,156; In the Matter of Van Sickle (Review Dept. 2006) 4 Cal. State Bar Ct. Rptr. 980, 993-994.)

Emotional/Physical Difficulties: Respondent has provided medical records showing that, during the period in which Respondent failed to cooperate with the State Bar investigation, she was suffering depression which negatively impacted her ability to face her professional obligations. Respondent has obtained medical treatment and is making progress toward recovery, and is entitled to some mitigation notwithstanding that these difficulties are not completely resolved. (See In the Matter of Deierling (Review Dept. 1991) 1 Cal. State Bar Ct. Rptr 552, 560-561 .) Since June 17, 2013, Respondent has been receiving psychiatric treatment from Dr. Robert P. Chang.

AUTHORITIES SUPPORTING DISCIPLINE.

The Standards for Attorney Sanctions for Professional Misconduct provide a "process of fixing discipline" pursuant to a set of written principles to "better discharge the purposes of attorney discipline as announced by the Supreme Court." (Rules Proc. of State Bar, tit. IV, Stds. for Atty. Sanctions for Prof. Misconduct, Introduction (all further references to standards are to this source).) The primary purposes of disciplinary proceedings and of the sanctions imposed are "the protection of the public, the courts and the legal profession; the maintenance of high professional standards by attorneys and the preservation of public confidence in the legal profession." (In re Morse (1995) 11 Cal.4th 184, 205; std. 1.3.)

Although not binding, the standards are entitled to "great weight" and should be followed "whenever possible" in determining level of discipline. (In re Silverton (2005) 36 Cal.4th 81, 92, quoting In re Brown (1995) 12 Cal.4th 205,220 and In re Young (1989) 49 Cal.3d 257, 267, fn. 11 .) Adherence to the standards in the great majority of cases serves the valuable purpose of eliminating disparity and assuring consistency, that is, the imposition of similar attorney discipline for instances of similar attorney misconduct. (In re Naney (1990) 51 Cal.3d 186, 190.) Any discipline recommendation different from that set forth in the applicable standards should clearly explain the reasons for the deviation. (Blair v. State Bar (1989) 49 Cal.3d 762, 776, fn. 5.)

In this case, Respondent failed to respond to two letters from a State Bar investigator seeking her response to the allegations of professional misconduct by her client, Robert Kay.

The most severe sanction applicable to Respondent’s misconduct is found in Standard 2.6(a), which applies to all violations of Business and Professions Code section 6068 - a statute that addresses a wide variety of "duties of an attorney" including, in subdivision (i), a duty to cooperate with the State Bar’s investigation - and calls for a range of discipline from suspension to disbarment. In this case, however, Respondent’s depression impacted her ability to face her professional obligations, including her obligation to respond to letters from the State Bar investigator.

Standard 1.7(a) provides that, if a member is found culpable of professional misconduct in any proceeding in which discipline may be imposed and the member has a record of one prior imposition of discipline, the degree of discipline imposed in the current proceeding shall be greater than that imposed in the prior proceeding unless the prior discipline imposed was so remote in time to the current proceeding and the offense for which it was imposed was so minimal in severity that imposing greater discipline in the current proceeding would be manifestly unjust. Accordingly, pursuant to standard 1.7(a), a level of discipline greater than private reproval is warranted for Respondent’s current misconduct.

Here, Respondent’s prior discipline in 2003, for failing to perform in a single client matter, is neither remote in time nor minimal in severity, and therefore a deviation from Standard 1.7(a) is unwarranted. However, the circumstances mitigating Respondent’s current misconduct are significant. Specifically, Respondent’s depression during the period of time that she failed to cooperate in the State Bar’s investigation, as well as the progress she has made in treatment for that depression, should be accorded substantial weight in mitigation, in addition to her mitigation for her agreement to enter into a pretrial stipulation. These circumstances support deviation from the "suspension to disbarment" level of discipline called for by Standard 2.6(a). A public reproval is adequate and appropriate under the circumstances.

COSTS OF DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS.

Respondent acknowledges that the Office of the Chief Trial Counsel has informed respondent that as of November 1, 2013, the prosecution costs in this matter total approximately $3,779. Respondent further acknowledges that should this stipulation be rejected or should relief from the stipulation be granted, the costs in this matter may increase due to the cost of further proceedings.

EXCLUSION FROM MCLE CREDIT

Pursuant to rule 3201, Respondent may not receive MCLE credit for completion of State Bar Ethics School, State Bar Client Trust Accounting School, and/or any other educational course(s) to be ordered as a condition of reproval or suspension. (Rules Proc. of State Bar, rule 3201.

SIGNATURE OF THE PARTIES

Case Number(s): 12-O-16695

In the Matter of: JACQUELINE ANN MANGUM

By their signatures below, the parties and their counsel, as applicable, signify their agreement with each of the recitation and each of the terms and conditions of this Stipulation Re Facts, Conclusions of Law and Disposition.

Signed by:

Respondent: JACQUELINE ANN MANGUM

Date: 11/15/13

Respondent’s Counsel:

Date:

Deputy Trial Counsel: Timothy G. Byer

Date: 11/20/13

REPROVAL ORDER

Case Number(s): 12-O-16695

In the Matter of: JACQUELINE ANN MANGUM

Finding the stipulation to be fair to the parties and that it adequately protects the public, IT IS ORDERED that the requested dismissal of counts/charges, if any, is GRANTED without prejudice, and:

<<not>> checked. The stipulated facts and disposition are APPROVED AND THE REPROVAL IMPOSED.

checked. The stipulated facts and disposition are APPROVED AS MODIFIED as set forth below, and the REPROVAL IMPOSED.

<<not>> checked. All court dates in the Hearing Department are vacated.

The parties are bound by the stipulation as approved unless: 1) a motion to withdraw or modify the stipulation, filed within 15 days after service of this order, is granted; or 2) this court modifies or further modifies the approved stipulation. (See rule 5.58 (E) & (F), Rules of Procedure.) Otherwise the stipulation shall be effective 15 days after service of this order.

Failure to comply with any conditions attached to this reproval may constitute cause for a separate proceeding for willful breach of rule 1-110, Rules of Professional Conduct.

Signed by:

Judge of the State Bar Court: Richard A. Platel

Date: 11/27/13

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

[Rules Proc. of State Bar; Rule 5.27(B); Code Civ. Proc., § 1013a(4)]

I am a Case Administrator of the State Bar Court of California. I am over the age of eighteen and not a party to the within proceeding. Pursuant to standard court practice, in the City and County of Los Angeles, on November 27, 2013, I deposited a true copy of the following document(s):

STIPULATION RE FACTS, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DISPOSITION AND

ORDER APPROVING

in a sealed envelope for collection and mailing on that date as follows:

checked. by first-class mail, with postage thereon fully prepaid, through the United States Postal Service at Los Angeles, California, addressed as follows:

JACQUELINE A. MANGUM

MANGUM LAW

2470 CORINTH AVE APT 5

LOS ANGELES, CA 90064

<<not>> checked. by certified mail, No. , with return receipt requested, through the United States Postal Service at , California, addressed as follows:

<<not>> checked. by overnight mail at , California, addressed as follows:

<<not>> checked. by fax transmission, at fax number . No error was reported by the fax machine that I used.

<<not>> checked. By personal service by leaving the documents in a sealed envelope or package clearly labeled to identify the attorney being served with a receptionist or a person having charge of the attorney’s office, addressed as follows:

checked. by interoffice mail through a facility regularly maintained by the State Bar of California addressed as follows:

TIMOTHY BYER, Enforcement, Los Angeles, California

I hereby certify that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed in Los Angeles, California, on November 27, 2013.

Signed by:

Johnnie Lee Smith

Case Administrator

State Bar Court