ILNews

Indianapolis law firm Stewart & Irwin closing

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

An Indianapolis law firm with a broad range of representation and diverse clientele plans to close its doors after more than 90 years.

Stewart & Irwin P.C. has notified current staff and former firm members that the firm will close in the coming weeks, according to an email provided to Indiana Lawyer. The email indicated that S&I is planning a private event for those associated with the firm.

President Mary Schmid and other firm executives did not reply to numerous telephone messages and emails seeking comment. Several attorneys familiar with the situation who spoke on condition of anonymity said several S&I shareholders have landed with other Indianapolis firms.

Stewart & Irwin is “essentially dissolving and the partners are scattering various places,” said an attorney who asked not to be identified. “Associates are jumping ship,” said another attorney who likewise did not wish to be named.

According to the firm’s website, Stewart & Irwin was founded in 1921 and represents a wide range of private-sector and government clients. The firm listed practice areas including automotive retail, corporate, general business, environmental, governmental affairs and regulation, insurance defense and coverage, medical malpractice defense, personal services, real estate, communications and utilities, estate and succession planning, employment and labor, intellectual property and technology, and construction and development.

Stewart & Irwin has downsized by almost one-third in the past five years. The firm lists on its website 24 lawyers, including 13 shareholders or equity shareholders, five associates and six attorneys listed either as of counsel or retired. In the 2008 Indiana Legal Directory, S&I listed 34 lawyers – 21 shareholders or equity shareholders, seven associates and six of counsel.  





 

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. Paul Ogden doing a fine job of remembering his peer Gary Welsh with the post below and a call for an Indy gettogether to celebrate Gary .... http://www.ogdenonpolitics.com/2016/05/indiana-loses-citizen-journalist-giant.html Castaways of Indiana, unite!

  2. It's unfortunate that someone has attempted to hijack the comments to promote his own business. This is not an article discussing the means of preserving the record; no matter how it's accomplished, ethics and impartiality are paramount concerns. When a party to litigation contracts directly with a reporting firm, it creates, at the very least, the appearance of a conflict of interest. Court reporters, attorneys and judges are officers of the court and must abide by court rules as well as state and federal laws. Parties to litigation have no such ethical responsibilities. Would we accept insurance companies contracting with judges? This practice effectively shifts costs to the party who can least afford it while reducing costs for the party with the most resources. The success of our justice system depends on equal access for all, not just for those who have the deepest pockets.

  3. As a licensed court reporter in California, I have to say that I'm sure that at some point we will be replaced by speech recognition. However, from what I've seen of it so far, it's a lot farther away than three years. It doesn't sound like Mr. Hubbard has ever sat in a courtroom or a deposition room where testimony is being given. Not all procedures are the same, and often they become quite heated with the ends of question and beginning of answers overlapping. The human mind can discern the words to a certain extent in those cases, but I doubt very much that a computer can yet. There is also the issue of very heavy accents and mumbling. People speak very fast nowadays, and in order to do that, they generally slur everything together, they drop or swallow words like "the" and "and." Voice recognition might be able to produce some form of a transcript, but I'd be very surprised if it produces an accurate or verbatim transcript, as is required in the legal world.

  4. Really enjoyed the profile. Congratulations to Craig on living the dream, and kudos to the pros who got involved to help him realize the vision.

  5. Why in the world would someone need a person to correct a transcript when a realtime court reporter could provide them with a transcript (rough draft) immediately?

ADVERTISEMENT