Matter of Mukambetova (2022 NY Slip Op 02202) Matter of Mukambetova 2022 NY Slip Op 02202 Decided on March 31, 2022 Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports. Decided and Entered: March 31, 2022 SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION First Judicial Department Rolando T. Acosta,P.J., Judith J. Gische Ellen Gesmer Manuel J. Mendez Julio Rodriguez III, JJ. Motion No. 2022-00350 Case No. 2021-02596 [*1]In the Matter of Asel Mukambetova, an Attorney and Counselor-at-Law: Attorney Grievance Committee for the First Judicial Department, Petitioner, Asel Mukambetova, (OCA Atty. Reg. No. 5667290.) Respondent. Disciplinary proceedings instituted by the Attorney Grievance Committee for the First Judicial Department. Respondent was admitted to the Bar of the State of New York at a Term of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court for the First Judicial Department on December 10, 2018. Jorge Dopico, Chief Attorney, Attorney Grievance Committee, New York (Thomas M. Lee, Esq., of counsel), for petitioner. Thomas J. Foley, Esq., for respondent. Per Curiam Respondent Asel Mukambetova was admitted to the practice of law in the State of New York by the First Judicial Department on December 10, 2018. At all times relevant to this proceeding, she has maintained a registered business address within the First Department. The parties stipulate that in June of 2019 respondent was retained for $8,800 to represent a client in an immigration removal proceeding, and to file applications for asylum and work authorization. In November of 2019 the client discharged respondent and disputed her demand for unpaid legal fees. In February of 2020 respondent discovered that in November of 2019 her former client posted a negative review of her on a public website, accusing respondent of lying and not performing the promised services. In February 2020, respondent sent an email to the former client in Russian - the language they used to communicate with each other - threatening: (1) to file a lawsuit against the client for not paying legal services and slander; (2) to give ICE and the Immigration Court information that the client illegally worked on repairing trucks and was interested in marriage fraud; and (3) she had all the evidence to have the client arrested and deported. Respondent never followed through on any of the threats. Respondent subsequently challenged and was eventually successful in having the website permanently remove the former client's online negative review. The former client filed a complaint with the Attorney Grievance Committee (AGC), which filed a petition asserting two disciplinary charges against respondent. The first disciplinary charge alleged that respondent's threats to report the complainant to the immigration authorities implied that respondent's status as an attorney would allow improper influence on immigration authorities to obtain the deportation of the complainant, in violation of rule 8.4(e)(1) of the Rules of Professional Conduct (22 NYCRR 1200.0). The second disciplinary charge alleged that by making the aforesaid threats to the complainant, …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals