Highly, highly recommend. I can't express how awesome Ringel & Brymer are. Jimmy Brymer is an…read moreabsolute beast of a negotiator. He took over everything for a very reasonable flat fee, didn't over-promise, and kept me well informed throughout the process. The final settlement was nearly exactly accurate to his prediction, actually being on the lower end of what he thought. I hope I never need to hire a lawyer again, but if I do, these guys are definitely my go-to from now on. If you want a lawyer that can handle his business and strives to earn your trust, Ringel & Brymer is the place to go.

This review concerns a case in which a disbarred lawyer worked on my file, that fact was admitted…read moreunder oath by opposing counsel, my own attorneys failed to act on that admission. Their failures were so extraordinary, that it seemed as if they were deliberately sabotaging my case. They ASKED to join my case against their old boss, claiming that they watched every day for cases which would let them "get back at" him. Yet, they removed claims from my lawsuit without asking first, failed to request a directed judgment when the Defendant admitted to stealing from me under oath, quit 4 days before a trial and billed for work never delivered. This review is to document failures by the law firm Ringel & Brymer which fatally harmed my case. Background and firm-level conflict: Ringel & Brymer sent me an unsolicited registered mail letter asking to be added as counsel and specifically offering the firm's services free of charge in my case against Derek Van Gilder whom both Ringel and Brymer had previously worked for/partnered with and whom I was suing for theft of retainer and failure to appear. I asked how James Ringel had become aware of my lawsuit against his former employer/partner and he replied that he'd been watching all filings in Bastrop courts for anything involving his former employer, looking for any opportunity to assist in any action against Derek Van Gilder. Obviously in retrospect this was a MASSIVE conflict of interest. Under the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct, this type of conflict is non-waivable, particularly given Ringel's claim that his former employment with Van Gilder would give him "the inside edge" in assisting me with my case. This unwaivable conflict is obvious to any first-year law student, or at minimum requires strict written informed consent and careful compliance. (TDRPC 1.06(a), 1.06(b), 1.09(a), 1.06(c)) Having already suffered theft at the hands of Van Gilder, not to mention having to take over the case I'd hired him for, I was financially strained and accepted James Ringel's offer of free help. At intake, I recall signing a written conflict waiver. My wife was present and independently recalls reviewing the document and seeing me sign it. But after the representation collapsed, Ringel stated in writing alternately that he could not recall whether any written conflict waiver exists, that he could accelerate the efforts of his staff to "find it" depending upon why I wanted it, and in the same email suggested, startlingly, that a conflict waiver might not have been required in this situation. For a partner-level attorney at a law firm to be unable to confirm whether written informed consent was obtained in a plainly conflicted engagement reflects either a serious firm-level compliance failure, or a fundamental lack of truthfulness. (TDRPC 1.01(b), 1.03(b), 1.06(c)) Failure to act on sworn testimony admitting use of a disbarred lawyer! During the proceedings, Derek Van Gilder testified under oath that a disbarred attorney, R. Allen Rogers, worked on my file. Understand, this was sworn testimony by the Defendant himself! That admission triggered IMMEDIATE obligations for Ringel and Brymer: to notify the court, to seek appropriate relief, and to address the legal and ethical consequences of a disbarred lawyer's participation. James Ringel and Jimmy Brymer did NOTHING. Worse, BOTH both had prior employment with Van Gilder and were in a position to know of Rogers's prohibited work on client files James filed no motion/objection, contacted no authorities. No relief or corrective action was taken. (TDRPC 1.01(a), 1.01(b), 1.03(a)) This failure to act exposes James Ringel and Jimmy Brymer to possible sanctions up to and including disbarment themselves, and brutally calls their integrity into question. (TDRPC 1.01(a), 1.01(b), 1.03(a)) Van Gilder's exhibits at trial showed billing me $400 per hour instead of $390 per hour, plus multiple $400+ charges for the same intake phone call. These exhibits were sufficient ON THEIR OWN to prove my claims of theft by Defendant. Despite this, no attorney from Ringel & Brymer moved for a directed verdict or judgment notwithstanding the verdict. James stopped communicating once the case went to appeal. Weeks/months went by without issuing witness subpoenas or engaging in trial prep. Nobody from the firm stepped in, FOUR DAYS before the trial I had to fire him to act on my own behalf, or lose by default. Each of the above failures are individually serious. However taken together they were devastating. The combined impact of such gross negligence was indistinguishable from DELIBERATE SABOTAGE of my legal interests, This failure raises serious questions under the Texas Disciplinary Rules and was referred to the appropriate authorities for review. I CANNOT recommend Ringel & Brymer for matters involving conflicts of interest, trial practice, ethical compliance, or deadline-critical litigation work.