ILNews

George Rubin's 54 years in law built firm and shaped modern Indianapolis

Dave Stafford
December 18, 2013
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indianapolis was America’s 26th biggest city when George Rubin began his legal career 54 years ago. It’s fair to say Rubin drafted the blueprint that transformed the city into the nation’s 12th largest.

Likewise, the founder of Rubin & Levin P.C. has influenced the growth and development of generations of attorneys.

rubinlevin01-15col.jpg George Rubin co-founded Rubin & Levin P.C. in 1977 with founding partner Elliott Levin. (IL Photo/Aaron P. Bernstein)

As he prepares to retire at the end of the year from a career spanning seven decades, Rubin, 81, can look back on professional accomplishments that place him a few notches above “mover and shaker.”

A state senator from 1969 to 1973, Rubin sponsored the Unigov legislation that created the consolidated city-county government structure for Indianapolis. He said he never imagined at the time that Indianapolis would grow as it has, but he’s not one to take credit.

“Without the right help, this would never have gone through. Dick Lugar was extremely helpful in pushing this through,” he said of the city’s then-mayor. The leadership of Lugar and subsequent mayors William Hudnut and Stephen Goldsmith, “that’s what made the city what it is today,” Rubin said.

Before Rubin left the Statehouse, he also put his stamp on another landmark law by creating the Indiana Uniform Consumer Credit Code. He soon returned to practice, and colleagues say his tireless work ethic and professionalism built a fine reputation for Rubin & Levin P.C.

A wry wit helped, too.

“George’s attention to detail was a learning experience for me,” partner John Hoard recalled of coming to the firm more than 20 years ago, already 12 years into his career.

“What he’s trying to say is, I was a nitpicker,” Rubin quipped, soliciting a quick round of laughs from partners who’ve been with him longest. They talked this month about his influence, which co-founder Elliot Levin said is evidenced by the firm’s national reputation in such representations as commercial collections, creditors’ rights, transactions and corporate bankruptcy.

Levin recalled Rubin carrying home a suitcase full of work after busy days at the office. “He did this because he wanted to know what was going on in each case,” Levin said.

‘Like family’

Christine Hayes Hickey has been Rubin & Levin’s managing partner for about a year, and she said Rubin has been a guide since before she entered the profession. She arrived at the firm straight out of college 25 years ago, then a paralegal studying for her J.D.

Few law school grads today will have such a mentor, she said. Rubin always was willing to help, from drafting letters to talking over the particulars of cases and strategies for negotiating, she said. “Sometimes they were small lessons, but they were life lessons.”

The firm has grown to its present staff of 21 lawyers guided by Rubin’s principles. “A firm this size, we all know and trust each other,” Hickey said. “It’s a little bit like family.”

That’s what an alumna of the firm also says. When partners Rubin and Levin left the old Bamberger & Feibleman firm in 1977 to hang their own shingle, their trusted paralegal Debbie Davis followed. She, too, began law school the next year.

rubinlevin03-15col.jpg Rubin & Levin managing partner Christine Hayes Hickey said Rubin’s example created a family-like atmosphere at the firm. (IL Photo/Aaron P. Bernstein)

“I had them hire this wonderful lawyer from Bamberger & Feibleman who ended up being my husband,” she said, laughing at the recollection. That lawyer was Neil Shook, who worked at the firm until the early 2000s, when the effects of a terminal illness, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, made it impossible to continue.

Davis – now Debbie Shook – remembered the support she received from Rubin and the firm when she took leave to care for Neil, who died in 2003. “They were wonderful, and they loved Neil,” she said. “We were kind of like family. George was like family.”

The firm welcomed Shook back on her schedule after her husband’s passing, and she stayed there until she took a position she still holds as a magistrate in the Marion Superior courts.

Talking about her friend and mentor, Shook recalled Rubin’s encouragement when she pursued law school. It didn’t matter that the law firm was just getting started and it was only Rubin, Levin and her.

“He knew I wanted to do it,” Shook said. “He actually paid a semester of my tuition. … He does have a heart of gold.

“I care very much for George and his wife, Jan, and I have the utmost respect for him. He was my mentor.”

Hoard said he was struck by Rubin’s and Levin’s commitment to family first. The partners strive to accommodate the family life of employees with flexible scheduling, for instance. “That resonates deeply with me,” he said.

Moving to Mass Ave.

When Rubin & Levin moved to its present location in the Marrott Center in 1985, Massachusetts Avenue in Indianapolis wasn’t the hotspot it has become. Rubin concedes it was a little dangerous. Levin remembers having gone to the same building years earlier for his Army induction physical.

But the partners saw something in the location and were able to purchase the five-story building from then-Judge Andy Jacobs Sr., Rubin recalled, well before the first trendy nightclub opened on the downtown strip.

But moving in wasn’t a cinch. The building had to be gutted, and the ground floor housed a retailer called Kelley’s Bargain Store, whose owner “had been there so many years he thought it was his,” Rubin said. But in time, the building was renovated, one of the first redevelopments on the avenue.

Just as the firm was ahead of the curve on selecting a Mass Ave. location, Hoard said the partners also were early adopters of technology. But there were some technological concessions Rubin wasn’t willing to make.

“In this firm, we don’t screen our calls,” Levin said. That’s in keeping with Rubin’s willingness to talk to anyone who dials, and an insistence that lawyers know the details of their clients’ cases well enough to be able to talk with them whenever they call.

Lawyers who trained under Rubin say he set the bar high. Christopher Baker, now a member at Tucker Hester Baker Krebs LLC, worked at Rubin & Levin from 1982 to 2004.

rubinlevin05-15col.jpg Rubin & Levin co-founder Elliott Levin said Rubin fought for principles he believed in, even when it put him at odds with political allies. (IL Photo/Aaron P. Bernstein)

“I watched them grow for a number of years and develop a very good and successful creditors’ rights practice,” Baker said. “That in large part is due to George’s leadership and the way that he thought the practice of law should be accomplished – do it right, put out a good product and zealously represent your client.”

Baker said younger attorneys may not realize Rubin’s influence not just on the profession, but as a drafter of the Uniform Consumer Credit Code. “Seeing George leave the practice of law will clearly make the creditors’ rights bar a little different now. … I think the practice is better in Indianapolis because George was part of it and George helped develop it.”

Levin noted that Rubin also took the forefront even on some difficult issues. He noted, for instance, that Rubin opposed 1970s state laws criminalizing education about abortion rights, a stance that put him at odds with some of his fellow Republicans.

“He feels very principled about a matter and will fight for that principle,” Levin said.

Rubin said his plans for retirement don’t differ from what he did during his working life. He’ll still take daily walks at Eagle Creek Park and still travel with his wife.

Hickey said Rubin will still be setting an example for the firm, just like he’s done for so many lawyers.

“When something leaves our door, we want it to be right,” Hickey said.•

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Call it unauthorized law if you must, a regulatory wrong, but it was fraud and theft well beyond that, a seeming crime! "In three specific cases, the hearing officer found that Westerfield did little to no work for her clients but only issued a partial refund or no refund at all." That is theft by deception, folks. "In its decision to suspend Westerfield, the Supreme Court noted that she already had a long disciplinary history dating back to 1996 and had previously been suspended in 2004 and indefinitely suspended in 2005. She was reinstated in 2009 after finally giving the commission a response to the grievance for which she was suspended in 2004." WOW -- was the Indiana Supreme Court complicit in her fraud? Talk about being on notice of a real bad actor .... "Further, the justices noted that during her testimony, Westerfield was “disingenuous and evasive” about her relationship with Tope and attempted to distance herself from him. They also wrote that other aggravating factors existed in Westerfield’s case, such as her lack of remorse." WOW, and yet she only got 18 months on the bench, and if she shows up and cries for them in a year and a half, and pays money to JLAP for group therapy ... back in to ride roughshod over hapless clients (or are they "marks") once again! Aint Hoosier lawyering a great money making adventure!!! Just live for the bucks, even if filthy lucre, and come out a-ok. ME on the other hand??? Lifetime banishment for blowing the whistle on unconstitutional governance. Yes, had I ripped off clients or had ANY disciplinary history for doing that I would have fared better, most likely, as that it would have revealed me motivated by Mammon and not Faith. Check it out if you doubt my reading of this, compare and contrast the above 18 months with my lifetime banishment from court, see appendix for Bar Examiners report which the ISC adopted without substantive review: https://www.scribd.com/doc/299040839/2016Petitionforcert-to-SCOTUS

  2. Wow, over a quarter million dollars? That is a a lot of commissary money! Over what time frame? Years I would guess. Anyone ever try to blow the whistle? Probably not, since most Hoosiers who take notice of such things realize that Hoosier whistleblowers are almost always pilloried. If someone did blow the whistle, they were likely fired. The persecution of whistleblowers is a sure sign of far too much government corruption. Details of my own personal experience at the top of Hoosier governance available upon request ... maybe a "fake news" media outlet will have the courage to tell the stories of Hoosier whistleblowers that the "real" Hoosier media (cough) will not deign to touch. (They are part of the problem.)

  3. So if I am reading it right, only if and when African American college students agree to receive checks labeling them as "Negroes" do they receive aid from the UNCF or the Quaker's Educational Fund? In other words, to borrow from the Indiana Appellate Court, "the [nonprofit] supposed to be [their] advocate, refers to [students] in a racially offensive manner. While there is no evidence that [the nonprofits] intended harm to [African American students], the harm was nonetheless inflicted. [Black students are] presented to [academia and future employers] in a racially offensive manner. For these reasons, [such] performance [is] deficient and also prejudice[ial]." Maybe even DEPLORABLE???

  4. I'm the poor soul who spent over 10 years in prison with many many other prisoners trying to kill me for being charged with a sex offense THAT I DID NOT COMMIT i was in jail for a battery charge for helping a friend leave a boyfriend who beat her I've been saying for over 28 years that i did not and would never hurt a child like that mine or anybody's child but NOBODY wants to believe that i might not be guilty of this horrible crime or think that when i say that ALL the paperwork concerning my conviction has strangely DISAPPEARED or even when the long beach judge re-sentenced me over 14 months on a already filed plea bargain out of another districts court then had it filed under a fake name so i could not find while trying to fight my conviction on appeal in a nut shell people are ALWAYS quick to believe the worst about some one well I DID NOT HURT ANY CHILD EVER IN MY LIFE AND HAVE SAID THIS FOR ALMOST 30 YEARS please if anybody can me get some kind of justice it would be greatly appreciated respectfully written wrongly accused Brian Valenti

  5. A high ranking Indiana supreme Court operative caught red handed leading a group using the uber offensive N word! She must denounce or be denounced! (Or not since she is an insider ... rules do not apply to them). Evidence here: http://m.indianacompanies.us/friends-educational-fund-for-negroes.364110.company.v2#top_info

ADVERTISEMENT