ILNews

Former foreclosure lawyer charged with fraud

Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Indiana has filed mail fraud charges against a former Indianapolis attorney who resigned from the bar two years ago.

A result of an FBI investigation, U.S. Attorney Tim Morrison on Thursday filed charges against Brian L. Nehrig, 43, who practiced at an Indianapolis law firm before resigning in August 2007. His foreclosure work at the firm between February 28, 2005, and Oct. 11, 2006, is the focus of the case.

His duties were to attend sheriff's sales and place minimum price bids on foreclosed properties for CitiMorgage, so that third-party bidders could then put their offers in and CitiMortgage could recover money from the sale if a property was sold for more than the minimum. But without the client's authorization, Nehrig is accused of intentionally inflating those minimum bidding prices and then completing the sales with third-party bidders, whom he was associated with outside of CitiMortgage's knowledge and permission. Nehrig hid the conduct by sending CitiMortgage a check for its minimum $1 price to make the company believe its property sold at the sheriff's sale in an arm's length transaction, the charging document alleges.

On many occasions, Nehrig directed a law firm employee to alter the titleholder's name on the deeds from CitiMortgage to replace it with the name of the third party with whom he'd negotiated the outside deal, the charges state. The total difference between the funds sent to CitiMortgage and the actual received funds from the deals was $106,122, and he didn't send the money back to CitiMortgage, the document says. Properties listed in the charging document are scattered throughout the state.

Nehrig faces 20 years in prison and a $250,000 fine if convicted.

In August 2007, the Indiana Supreme Court concluded a disciplinary action against Nehrig by accepting his resignation. The Disciplinary Commission had filed misconduct charges against him and asked for his immediate suspension earlier that year.

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. The practitioners and judges who hail E-filing as the Saviour of the West need to contain their respective excitements. E-filing is federal court requires the practitioner to cram his motion practice into pigeonholes created by IT people. Compound motions or those seeking alternative relief are effectively barred, unless the practitioner wants to receive a tart note from some functionary admonishing about the "problem". E-filing is just another method by which courts and judges transfer their burden to practitioners, who are the really the only powerless components of the system. Of COURSE it is easier for the court to require all of its imput to conform to certain formats, but this imposition does NOT improve the quality of the practice of law and does NOT improve the ability of the practitioner to advocate for his client or to fashion pleadings that exactly conform to his client's best interests. And we should be very wary of the disingenuous pablum about the costs. The courts will find a way to stick it to the practitioner. Lake County is a VERY good example of this rapaciousness. Any one who does not believe this is invited to review the various special fees that system imposes upon practitioners- as practitioners- and upon each case ON TOP of the court costs normal in every case manually filed. Jurisprudence according to Aldous Huxley.

  2. Any attorneys who practice in federal court should be able to say the same as I can ... efiling is great. I have been doing it in fed court since it started way back. Pacer has its drawbacks, but the ability to hit an e-docket and pull up anything and everything onscreen is a huge plus for a litigator, eps the sole practitioner, who lacks a filing clerk and the paralegal support of large firms. Were I an Indiana attorney I would welcome this great step forward.

  3. Can we get full disclosure on lobbyist's payments to legislatures such as Mr Buck? AS long as there are idiots that are disrespectful of neighbors and intent on shooting fireworks every night, some kind of regulations are needed.

  4. I am the mother of the child in this case. My silence on the matter was due to the fact that I filed, both in Illinois and Indiana, child support cases. I even filed supporting documentation with the Indiana family law court. Not sure whether this information was provided to the court of appeals or not. Wish the case was done before moving to Indiana, because no matter what, there is NO WAY the state of Illinois would have allowed an appeal on a child support case!

  5. "No one is safe when the Legislature is in session."

ADVERTISEMENT