“Law is a glittering lure. But there is the rare occasion when the client can be fooled on a level beyond flash, if he has a sentimental bond with the product, me, and my fee.”
With apologies to Mad Men.
Howdy crooked lawyer Sonja Hein-Schnieder,
You took on three cases. All concerning a young migrant. My Tibetan daughter. More than three years ago. From the very start you cared shit! Not only that. You colluded with the judge and the opposing party. Then you just fucked off into the sunset by having a fax (which is against the law) sent to the court by a third person (again against the law) on the day of a hearing. Your reason? No time. Gee, you are quite some friggin’ ridiculous lawyer chick to say the least.
Gets even better. You publicly proclaimed in an interview with the Munich Bar Association to have a sentimental relation with money and you do not feel properly remunerated. That’s deft. Then you have it pulled from their website, forgetting there’s the Wayback Machine and Docplayer. Embarrassing. That exactly seems to be your TM.
Ovid might offer some perspective: “Let your swift mind encompass what it is that you love, and withdraw your neck from the collar that hurts you. … You see few rivers flow from mighty fountains: by many inflowing waters they’re multiplied.”
Perhaps you try to turn a little professional and the monetary flow will be multiplied. It might also be advisable you add a “safe harbour” statement to your public presence so that people have a chance to stay clear. Sturgeon’s Law, ya know.
I have copy/pasted the following, blatantly breaking all copyrights. Here we go:
“If the lawyer gives notice of termination – in the form of a declaration of intent which must be received – he/she has a post-contractual (subsequent) duty to provide information if the (former) client is threatened, for example, with direct damage related to the previous performance of the contract – for example, as a result of the expiry of a deadline. Various professional duties also have an after-effect – and remuneration must be secured.”
“Sofern es zu einer Kündigung seitens des Rechtsanwalts oder der Rechtsanwältin – in Form einer empfangsbedürftigen Willenserklärung – kommt, trifft diesen/diese eine nachvertragliche (nachwirkende) Pflicht zur Aufklärung, wenn der (ehemaligen) Mandantschaft bspw. ein unmittelbarer, mit der vorangegangenen Vertragserfüllung zusammenhängender Schaden – etwa infolge eines Fristablaufs – droht. Auch wirken diverse Berufspflichten nach – und es gilt, die Vergütung zu sichern.”
Here we are on the subject me thinks. I would appreciate you disclose what you have raked in. Raked in under breach of contract, mind you. One can hardly call it “earned” in an ethical sense. But hey, that’s you.
Section 627 BGB (German Civil Code) states:
“The right of termination is restricted for the lawyer only insofar as it may not be declared “untimely”, as stipulated by Section 627 (2) of the German Civil Code (BGB). Such a termination would be the case, for example, if the advisor resigns his or her mandate immediately before the filing of the application or the suspension of the statute of limitations for which he or she was called in, or shortly before a court date, and the client – possibly under the pressure of the application or statute of limitations deadline or the date – must now act independently because he or she can no longer find a new advisor in the short time available.”
“Das Recht zur Kündigung ist für den Rechtsanwalt oder die Rechtsanwältin lediglich insoweit eingeschränkt, als diese nicht „zur Unzeit“ erklärt werden darf, wie es § 627 Abs. 2 BGB vorschreibt. Eine solche Kündigung wäre beispielsweise der Fall, wenn der Berater unmittelbar vor der Antragstellung oder Verjährungshemmung, zu der er hinzugezogen wurde, oder kurz vor einem Gerichtstermin sein Mandat niederlegt und der Mandant bzw. die Mandantin – u. U. unter dem Druck der Antrags- oder Verjährungsfrist oder des Termins – nunmehr eigenständig handeln muss, weil er, bzw. sie in der Kürze der Zeit keinen neuen Berater mehr finden kann.”
Then there is the claim for remuneration, section 628 BGB (German Civil Code). Have you heard of it?
“Upon termination, the attorney’s remuneration for the services rendered up to that point shall be due in full pursuant to Section 8 (1) RVG. In addition, after the termination of the mandate, there is an obligation to settle and, if necessary, repay advances received.”
“Mit der Kündigung ist die Vergütung des Rechtsanwalts bzw. der Rechtsanwältin für die bis dahin erbrachten Leistungen nach § 8 Abs. 1 RVG insgesamt fällig. Zudem besteht nach der Kündigung des Mandats eine Verpflichtung, erhaltene Vorschüsse abzurechnen und ggfs. zurückzuzahlen.”
Un peu more detailed it reads something like this:
“If, after the commencement of the service, the employment relationship is terminated on the basis of Section 626 or Section 627 of the German Civil Code, the obligated party may, in accordance with Section 628 (1) sentence 1 of the German Civil Code, in principle demand a part of the remuneration corresponding to the services rendered to date. If he terminates the contract without being induced to do so by conduct in breach of contract on the part of the other party, or if he induces the termination of the contract by his conduct in breach of contract on the part of the other party, he shall not be entitled to remuneration to the extent that his previous services have become partially insignificant for the other party as a result of the termination. This does not pose any major problems in the case of consulting services on an hourly basis. In the case of remuneration according to RVG, this can lead to the complete omission of remuneration in court proceedings. This is illustrated by the BGH (ruling dated 29.9.2011 – IX ZR 170/10):
(1) If the lawyer terminates the client-lawyer relationship without being induced to do so by the other party’s conduct in breach of the contract, he shall not be entitled to remuneration insofar as the client has to appoint another attorney-at-law, whose remuneration would also cover the terminating lawyer’s work.
(2) A loss of interest shall also be assumed insofar as the attorneys who have been newly instructed on the basis of the termination can no longer perform timely procedural acts, can no longer submit timely declarations and can no longer participate in past appointments if these acts would also have been compensated with the statutory remuneration owed to them.”
You just vanished into thin, corrupt Bavarian air. However, you still proffer your questionable services on the Lawyer YouPorn site ‘my-sozialberatung‘ as of writing. A sort of honeytrap to lure unsuspecting potential clients.
Did you consider all this, or is professionalism anathema to you and you think you can just sneak away?
“Wird nach dem Beginn der Dienstleistung das Dienstverhältnis auf Grund des § 626 oder des § 627 BGB gekündigt, so kann der Verpflichtete nach § 628 Abs. 1 S. 1 BGB grundsätzlich einen den bisherigen Leistungen entsprechenden Teil der Vergütung verlangen. Kündigt er, ohne durch vertragswidriges Verhalten des anderen Teiles dazu veranlasst zu sein, oder veranlasst er durch sein vertragswidriges Verhalten die Kündigung des anderen Teiles, so steht ihm ein Anspruch auf die Vergütung insoweit nicht zu, als seine bisherigen Leistungen infolge der Kündigung für den anderen zum Teil bedeutungslos geworden sind. Dies stellt bei Beratungsleistungen auf Stundenbasis keine großen Probleme dar. Bei einer Vergütung nach RVG kann dies im gerichtlichen Verfahren dazu führen, dass eine Vergütung gänzlich wegfällt. Hierzu anschaulich der BGH (Urt. v. 29.9.2011 − IX ZR 170/10):
- Kündigt der Rechtsanwalt das Mandatsverhältnis, ohne durch vertragswidriges Verhalten des anderen Teils dazu veranlasst zu sein, steht ihm ein Anspruch auf Vergütung insoweit nicht zu, als der Mandant einen anderen Prozessbevollmächtigten neu bestellen muss, mit dessen Vergütung auch die Tätigkeit des kündigenden Anwalts abgegolten wäre.
- Von einem Interessenwegfall ist auch auszugehen, soweit die auf Grund der Kündigung neu beauftragten Rechtsanwälte fristgebundene Verfahrenshandlungen nicht mehr vornehmen, fristgebundene Erklärungen nicht mehr abgeben und an vergangenen Terminen nicht mehr teilnehmen können, wenn mit der ihnen geschuldeten gesetzlichen Vergütung auch diese Handlungen abgegolten gewesen wären.”
The following should be taken cum grano salis, especially since you as a lawyer do not want to compromise your excellent relationship with the Social Court and the Jobcenter to your own disadvantage (which should always be avoided. Keyword ‘Dinero, Buckeroos’). Be that as it may:
“In the event of termination of the contract by the professional, in order to avoid loss of rights on the part of the client, those actions must be taken which are reasonable and cannot be postponed; this refers in particular to the duty to inform and clarify. This includes, for example, the duty to inform the client of current deadlines or of corresponding risks that can only be avoided by immediate action.”
“Bei einer Kündigung des Auftrags durch den Berufsträger bzw. die Berufsträgerin sind zur Vermeidung von Rechtsverlusten des Auftraggebers/der Auftraggeberin in jedem Fall noch diejenigen Handlungen vorzunehmen, die zumutbar sind und keinen Aufschub dulden; gemeint sind damit insbesondere Hinweis- und Aufklärungspflichten. Hierzu gehört beispielsweise die Pflicht, dem Auftraggeber/der Auftraggeberin laufende Fristen mitzuteilen oder über entsprechende Risiken, die nur durch sofortiges Handeln vermieden werden können, aufzuklären.”
Perhaps the following professional law implications would be important for attorneys to consider. In case you fuckin’ care:
“Pursuant to Section 43a (5) BRAO in conjunction with Section 4 BORA, third-party funds are to be paid out at the latest immediately after the termination of the mandate or – insofar as possible and permissible – offset against outstanding fee claims.
The lawyer’s duty of confidentiality under Section 43a (2) BRAO in conjunction with Section 2 (1) BORA shall continue to apply after termination of the client relationship.
Pursuant to Section 11 (1) sentence 1 BORA, the client must be informed without delay and without separate request of all events and measures of importance for the progress of the case. The client must be informed of all important documents received or sent. This obligation shall continue to apply even after the lawyer’s mandate has been terminated, provided that the lawyer receives documents.
In this respect, it is advisable to inform the other party of this after resigning from the mandate. However, in legal proceedings, the power of attorney continues to exist until a new attorney is appointed, Section 87 (1) ZPO. Here, if necessary, service is to be effected and acknowledgement of receipt is to be made in accordance with § 14 BORA.
Pursuant to Section 50 (3) BRAO, the handing over of the case file, if requested, may in principle be refused until the lawyer is satisfied with regard to the fees and expenses owed by the client. This does not apply, however, if the withholding would be unreasonable under the circumstances, e.g. would lead to a considerable loss of rights.”
“Fremdgelder sind nach § 43a Abs. 5 BRAO i. V .m. § 4 BORA spätestens unverzüglich nach Mandatsniederlegung auszukehren bzw. – sofern möglich und zulässig – mit offenen Gebührenforderungen zu verrechnen.
Die anwaltliche Schweigepflicht aus § 43a Abs. 2 BRAO i. V. m. § 2 Abs. 1 BORA gilt auch nach Beendigung des Mandatsverhältnisses fort.
Nach § 11 Abs. 1 S. 1 BORA ist die Mandantschaft über alle für den Fortgang der Sache wesentlichen Vorgänge und Maßnahmen unverzüglich und ohne gesonderte Aufforderung zu unterrichten. Ihr sind alle wesentlichen erhaltenen oder versandten Schriftstücke zur Kenntnis zu geben. Diese Verpflichtung wirkt auch nach Mandatsniederlegung fort, sofern der Rechtsanwalt/die Rechtsanwältin Schriftstücke erhält.
Insoweit empfiehlt es sich, nach Mandatsniederlegung die Gegenseite davon zu unterrichten. Allerdings besteht im Anwaltsprozess die Vollmacht so lange fort, bis ein neuer Prozessbevollmächtigter bestellt ist, § 87 Abs. 1 ZPO. Hier sind ggfs. Zustellung zu bewirken und noch Empfangsbekenntnis nach § 14 BORA abzugeben.
Die etwaig gewünschte Herausgabe der Handakte kann nach § 50 Abs. 3 BRAO grundsätzlich so lange verweigert werden, bis der Rechtsanwalt bzw. die Rechtsanwältin wegen der von dem/der Auftraggebenden geschuldeten Gebühren und Auslagen befriedigt ist. Dies gilt allenfalls dann nicht, soweit das Vorenthalten nach den Umständen unangemessen wäre, also bspw. zu einem erheblichen Rechtsverlust führen würde.”
I hate to tell you, but you give the appearance of a fly-by-night lawyer. It should be mentioned for the sake of completeness, the Munich Social Kangaroo Court didn’t give a damn your breaking the law. Who knew?
Well, Jobcenter, Social Court and lawyer, the burning question again, how much money have you cleaned up? You, the lawyer who has achieved nothing, absofuckinglutely nothing over more three years.
A lawyer, socially engaged in ‘reboarding‘ (one wonders about the experience being reboarded by you) and enhanced with prominent Pinterest presence is kindly requested to make an effort.
IOW, me likes to see an answer by August 10, 2022.
An answer that does not insult my intelligence. Thanks a lotta.
I have a lovely pastime, madam. I love chewing gum and kickin’ fuckin’ ass. Trouble is, I’m outa gum.
If this all sounds like I detest you, it couldn’t be further from the truth. You’re just a sick, fuckin’ joke of a lawyer without any integrity. Besides, you’re blonde. You crooked lawyer simply helped/stood by in defrauding my daughter and her mother. In racist Germany. Oh btw, have you and Dan Hull (1) ever met by any chance?
Lastly, I’d like to mention the Nepali lawyer Sapana Malla who I know personally. She is an absolute professional of utmost integrity. You might want to know, Nepalis make a certain sound and gesture when they express disgust about someone. It is unmistakable and deeply embarrassing. Just saying.
If you’ll excuse me now. I’ll have to check why my pink 1973 Hyundai refuses to run. Breaks my heart. We have such a deep relationship.
À plus tard,
(draw in my signature here)
I am not an attorney, but Leonard J. Crabs is.
(1) US based corporate litigator Dan Hull in an email in 2016: “A lot of German lawyers are assholes”.
THIS E-MAIL CONTAINS INFORMATION WHICH IS CONFIDENTIAL AND MAY BE SUBJECT TO LEGAL PRIVILEGE. NOBODY UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES MAY READ IT. IF YOU ARE READING THIS, THEN I CAN SUE YOU AND I WILL SUE YOU ONCE I FIGURE OUT WHAT IS WRONG WITH MY CAR. IT SIMPLY DOES NOT RUN. WHY IS THAT? AND NO, I WILL NOT TAKE THE BUS, I DEMAND MY CAR WORK, AS ORIGINALLY PROMISED BY THE HYUNDAI DEALERSHIP. IF I AM CURRENTLY READING THIS, THEN THIS IS A REMINDER FOR ME TO CALL DAVE AT THE HYUNDAI DEALERSHIP AND GIVE HIM A PIECE OF MY MIND.
But wait! That’s not all!