Wildeshauser Lawyer Initially convicted: 31,800 euros to be paid!

A lawyer from Wildeshausen was once again faced with severe allegations before the Oldenburg district court. In a current procedure that ended in a comparison, the lawyer was sentenced to pay of 31,800 euros after a former client reclaimed lawyers and court costs of EUR 47,709.40. The parties agreed to pay two thirds of the sum within six weeks, otherwise the full amount would be due. The presiding judge commented "stunned" about the behavior of the lawyer, who worked for the plaintiff in several civil proceedings until he found him and filed him a year ago.

The court found that the lawyer did not forward funds to the client and had not submitted complaints on time. Nevertheless, the plaintiff has to pay fees despite the "bad performance" of the lawyer. In addition, the lawyer demanded 16,000 euros for a witness service fee, but this was rejected by the court. The lawyer argued that this high claim resulted from the amount in dispute of the case. However, the court found that the client's right to refuse was clear. If there had been no comparison, the plaintiff would have been awarded a higher sum, which would have extended the process.

previous conviction and other procedures

The Wildeshaus lawyer had already been sentenced to 22 months ago about a year ago for fraud and also reimbursed 403,000 euros. A review by the Federal Court of Justice is still pending. The lawyer is also charged with fraud and infidelity in another criminal trial. Previously, he had sued for claims for legal protection insurance of 5,000 euros, whereby a decision by the Chamber is expected to be expected by the end of March.

In another procedure, the lawyer, who was charged with commercial fraud, saw himself confronted with a judgment that provided a punishment of one year and ten months on probation. The district court of Oldenburg wants to move in 403,000 euros from him. The presiding judge Judith Blohm found that the accused damaged the reputation of his profession. Despite a severe psychological burden and the loss of his reputation, he was spared a job ban.

The defendant's defendant advocated acquittal and argued that no fraudulent acts were made. The judge saw no room for an acquittal and evaluated the testimony of the witnesses as credible without misunderstanding between the client and the lawyer. The defendant had requested advances for non -required services and must also be responsible for pressure under which the repayments took place. The court remains undecided whether the accused will appeal against the judgment.