ILNews

Looking on the Bright Side...

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

 

Robin Babbitt mug Robin L. Babbitt
Indianapolis Bar Foundation
President

I freely admit this is the time of year that I question my family’s decision to establish our residence north of the Mason-Dixon Line. Going for weeks on end without sunshine is not good for one’s soul. In Indiana, March is the month that typically throws a couple of cruel jokes this way. About the time Hoosiers become convinced that we have turned the corner and Spring has really arrived, the weather gods typically throw in a last winter storm (or two).

When winter gets the best of me, I reflect back on my move to Indianapolis in 1977 and the beginning of my studies at the IU Indianapolis School of Law. I entered law school at a time when it was being portrayed in an unflattering light in books (Scott Turow’s – 1L), in movies (Paper Chase) and on TV. I probably was not alone in starting law school with the firm conviction that I would be lucky to graduate. Superimposing images of Professor Kingsfield with unknown classmates who would sabotage anyone standing in their way to improve their class standing was not comforting.

The good news is that my reality was nothing like the events portrayed in the movie and TV series. Professors like Dean Harvey, Bruce Townsend and Chuck Kelso – while legendary – were brilliant, compassionate and fair. It did not take me long to come to the inescapable conclusion that my colleagues (in the Class of 1980) would form a group of the finest people and most accomplished professionals I would come to know. I will point out only one of them (at the risk of his certain embarrassment) because I think he is an excellent combination of all of the qualities that made our class special.

Ross Rudolph, a well respected trial lawyer and mediator who has practiced in Evansville for the past 30+ years, quickly became a very close friend. In short order during the Fall of 1977, Ross displayed his true colors. He had diligently prepared a typed outline (at a time you had to use White-Out to make even a simple correction) that he updated daily based upon the assigned reading in Contracts I and that he supplemented with his handwritten class notes. When Prof. Kelso told us he would give us a midterm so that we would have an appreciation for what it would be like to take a law school final before the end of the first semester rolled around, Ross offered to give a couple of us a copy of his outline in order to assist with our exam preparation. Almost immediately, it seemed as if copies were being made for our entire Contracts class. In short, Ross was happy to lose his hard-earned competitive advantage in order to lend a helping hand to his classmates. He was (and is) the model of a person who does things for the greater good at the sacrifice of personal gain. He was (and is) the consummate “team player”. He wanted to do well, but not at anyone else’s expense. Scott Turow must not have had a classmate like Ross.

Over the course of my 30 years of practice, I have been constantly reminded that the ability to practice law before, with and even against principled people with common “Hoosier values” is an immeasurable blessing that makes suffering through Indiana winters bearable. I had similar thoughts as I sat on the podium in January to witness President Mike Hebenstreit’s installation. As his family looked on with pride, I recognized how fortunate our bar association is to be led by someone who (like my classmate Ross Rudolph) is equipped with the full complement of the most important skills that a Hoosier lawyer can possess. When the going gets tough, I simply reflect on how fortunate I was to land in such a welcoming place chocked full of people of great character.

Part of that package is the unselfish desire to help those most in need. We are blessed to participate in a noble profession that gives us the ability to provide for those who depend upon us. I ask each of you to tap into that sense of altruism by generously supporting the Indianapolis Bar Foundation. It is as simple as going to the Indianapolis Bar Foundation website (www.indybar.org/about/bar-foundation) to donate online or to call Megan Keever at the Bar Foundation office (269-2000) to tell her that you would like to make a pledge. Rest assured, the Foundation will put your generosity to good use.

Ain’t it great to live in Indiana? …•

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. Mr. Ricker, how foolish of you to think that by complying with the law you would be ok. Don't you know that Indiana is a state that welcomes monopolies, and that Indiana's legislature is the one entity in this state that believes monopolistic practices (such as those engaged in by Indiana Association of Beverage Retailers) make Indiana a "business-friendly" state? How can you not see this????

  2. Actually, and most strikingly, the ruling failed to address the central issue to the whole case: Namely, Black Knight/LPS, who was NEVER a party to the State court litigation, and who is under a 2013 consent judgment in Indiana (where it has stipulated to the forgery of loan documents, the ones specifically at issue in my case)never disclosed itself in State court or remediated the forged loan documents as was REQUIRED of them by the CJ. In essence, what the court is willfully ignoring, is that it is setting a precedent that the supplier of a defective product, one whom is under a consent judgment stipulating to such, and under obligation to remediate said defective product, can: 1.) Ignore the CJ 2.) Allow counsel to commit fraud on the state court 3.) Then try to hide behind Rooker Feldman doctrine as a bar to being held culpable in federal court. The problem here is the court is in direct conflict with its own ruling(s) in Johnson v. Pushpin Holdings & Iqbal- 780 F.3d 728, at 730 “What Johnson adds - what the defendants in this suit have failed to appreciate—is that federal courts retain jurisdiction to award damages for fraud that imposes extrajudicial injury. The Supreme Court drew that very line in Exxon Mobil ... Iqbal alleges that the defendants conducted a racketeering enterprise that predates the state court’s judgments ...but Exxon Mobil shows that the Rooker Feldman doctrine asks what injury the plaintiff asks the federal court to redress, not whether the injury is “intertwined” with something else …Because Iqbal seeks damages for activity that (he alleges) predates the state litigation and caused injury independently of it, the Rooker-Feldman doctrine does not block this suit. It must be reinstated.” So, as I already noted to others, I now have the chance to bring my case to SCOTUS; the ruling by Wood & Posner is flawed on numerous levels,BUT most troubling is the fact that the authors KNOW it's a flawed ruling and choose to ignore the flaws for one simple reason: The courts have decided to agree with former AG Eric Holder that national banks "Are too big to fail" and must win at any cost-even that of due process, case precedent, & the truth....Let's see if SCOTUS wants a bite at the apple.

  3. I am in NJ & just found out that there is a judgment against me in an action by Driver's Solutions LLC in IN. I was never served with any Court pleadings, etc. and the only thing that I can find out is that they were using an old Staten Island NY address for me. I have been in NJ for over 20 years and cannot get any response from Drivers Solutions in IN. They have a different lawyer now. I need to get this vacated or stopped - it is now almost double & at 18%. Any help would be appreciated. Thank you.

  4. I am in NJ & just found out that there is a judgment against me in an action by Driver's Solutions LLC in IN. I was never served with any Court pleadings, etc. and the only thing that I can find out is that they were using an old Staten Island NY address for me. I have been in NJ for over 20 years and cannot get any response from Drivers Solutions in IN. They have a different lawyer now. I need to get this vacated or stopped - it is now almost double & at 18%. Any help would be appreciated. Thank you.

  5. Please I need help with my class action lawsuits, im currently in pro-se and im having hard time findiNG A LAWYER TO ASSIST ME

ADVERTISEMENT