Home
> Criminal justice attorney in Madison, WI
> Nicholson, Gansner & Otis, S.C. Review
Nicholson, Gansner & Otis, S.C.
Criminal justice attorney in Madison, WIReviews: 15 | Overal Rating: Good
Excellect | |
Good | |
Average | |
Bad | |
Awful |
Excellect | |
Good | |
Average | |
Bad | |
Awful |
Reviews
I was scared for him because I knew he didn’t understand the seriousness of what he was facing and I had no control over his fate.
I spent a lot of time on the internet looking at law firm websites, reading their reviews and calling.
After talking to many law firms and explaining the charges against my son and his cognitive disability I felt hopeless. I was told things like “Those are some serious charges and usually they don’t have good outcomes”, “These are really tough cases and difficult to prove.” “You’re likely not going to get the outcome you’re hoping for”. They were willing to take on the case but I felt like they thought it was a lost cause.
Then I called Nicholson, Gansner & Otis and spoke with James the office manager who was kind, helpful, and reassuring.
Attorney Gansner was thought to be a good fit for my son’s case. At our first meeting I felt he heard me and that he could see what I was seeing, that my son did not comprehend. He said he would do his best to get the best possible outcome for my son. After a couple more interactions with Attorney Gansner I was confident he was doing his best and working hard to get the best possible outcome.
Attorney Gansner stayed true to his word. He worked hard and he delivered. He found the best expertise to prove his argument of my son’s case.
The judge ruled my son was unable to be brought to competency for trial and suspended proceedings against him.
I am ever so thankful for Attorney Gansner’s dedication, honesty, and kindness.
Thank you Attorney Gansner!”
I would say if you are stuck in a case and don’t know what to do, just call up this firm. You will get a great service and will end up a thoroughly satisfied client. I would’ve given 10 stars if I could!!
I was advised by Mr. Otis that the cost for representation was two fold, one cost would cover everything except a jury trial, the second cost would cover any fees that would be incurred and any expert witnesses to testify. I was advised by Mr. Otis that there would be an additional fee if the case went to a jury trial, which was a reasonable expectation. I was quoted a fee which in my opinion was reasonable.
I was advised by both Mr. Otis and Mr. Gasner that their law firm had a great deal of experience with the types of charges my brother was being accused of. Mr. Otis reported that he would not go as far as saying their law firm was experts in the field, but did have numerous similar cases.
Mr. Gasner arrived and represented my brother during the bond hearing, which I would consider a lack luster performance on Mr. Gasner part. During the conversation with Mr. Gasner, my sister and myself, I once again advised Mr. Gasner that any further representation would be the responsibility of my brother, the accused. At no time during the face to face conversation did Mr. Gasner advise that his law firm would need to increase the money required for representation.
The following day, after we bonded our brother out of jail, my brother contacted Mr. Gasner by telephone regarding his case. During that conversation, Mr. Gasner advised my brother that he was increasing the cost of representation due to the complexity of his case, and because the new rate was the going rate for those types of charges. The increased cost was a 50% increase from the verbal agreement I thought we had reached.
When my brother advised me of this information, I was obviously extremely angry at the 50% increase in cost. I advised my brother that I would locate another attorney that he could utilize for the allegations against him. Eventually my brother did contact and retained another attorney to represent him in his criminal matter. An attorney that my brother felt far more comfortable with, and who by the conversation itself with the attorney, appeared to be far more knowledgeable about the charges against my brother.
Prior to my brother retaining another attorney, I attempted to contact Mr. Gasner by telephone in order to see weather or not he would be able to negotiate the cost for representation. My call went to voicemail and I left a message for Mr. Gasner to contact me. Mr. Gasner did not contact me, but had his office manager attempt to contact me on two separate occasions, each call immediately following each other. At no time after that did Mr. Gasner make any attempt to personally contact me. I was hiring Mr. Gasner and I expected him to reach out to me, not his office manager.
Mr. Gasner advised that the case was far more complex then originally anticipated. I have issue with Mr. Gasner making such comments when Mr. Gasner had not received any reports, documents, recordings or videos or the like by the prosecution to reach such a conclusion. It was day 2 for Mr. Gasner and no reasonable person could have reached such a conclusion without any facts to support the belief that the case was going to be any more complex then another case.
In my opionion it was highly unacceptable and highly unethical for Mr. Gasner to attempt to charge my brother an increased cost for representation by FIFTY PERCENT.
It is my opinion that Mr. Gasner should have explained to my brother, that if the case became more complex then anticipated after having received and reviewed discovery from the prosecution, that the cost of representation may increase NOT BEFORE receiving any information as to specifics of the case.