Susman Godfrey’s Shawn Rabin Brings Texas Trial Savvy to New York City

Shawn Rabin is in a league entirely of his own. He hails from Texas, where the litigation powerhouse cut his teeth, started his practice and gained the most valuable of all courtroom tools – trial experience. And a lot of it.

In 2008, when elite trial firm Susman Godfrey committed to growing its office in New York City, Rabin jumped at the opportunity. But a nagging question seemed to keep finding him from various corridors: Can a Texas trial lawyer really make it in New York?

Perhaps the naysayers spurred him on, but the whispers have long since ceased. In the last 20 years, Rabin has built a high-profile client list and an enviable track record, leading him to be consecutively recognized as a Lawdragon 500 Leading Litigator in America and Leading Plaintiff Financial Lawyer, dating back to 2019. His career is consistently compelling, and his wins do more than astound – they speak to the core of who Rabin is as a lawyer.

“I don't really believe in the hourly billing model – my success hinges entirely on the success of the case,” says Rabin. “When my clients win, I win. If my clients lose, I lose. I love that.”

And when they win, they win big – Texas big.

Rabin represented WeWork founder, Adam Neumann, against Softbank when they withdrew a $3B offer, resulting in one of the largest ever individual litigation claims of the century. Weeks before trial, the case settled as reported by media outlets throughout the world. 

In an epic trade secret case that was closely followed by the press and legal insiders, Rabin and partner Bill Carmody represented Uber against Google’s Waymo over the technology behind self-driving cars. The team fought a hard-won battle and then successfully resolved the case during the first week of trial.

In the Southern District of New York, Rabin argued on behalf of General Electric in a breach of contract dispute with the Nebraska Investment Finance Authority. It took the jury just two hours to return a verdict valued at over $160M in General Electric’s favor.

“I like to think of myself as a trial specialist,” says Rabin. “Getting a case through discovery and into trial is what I specialize in, which is unique. Very few lawyers in New York have actually tried a complex case in front of a jury.”

Rabin’s achievements point to a degree of excellence that the experienced litigator brings to all of his cases. He and his colleagues now regularly get called in to SDNY and EDNY to take high-impact cases to trial, and do plenty of work in Delaware Chancery, too. Nearly 15 years after coming to the Big Apple, it’s clear his Texas trial roots were never something he had to overcome, but a superpower that puts him at the front of the pack.

Lawdragon: What was your path to becoming a lawyer?

Shawn Rabin: I grew up in a relatively small Texas town, about an hour north of Houston. I knew nothing about law or the legal profession, I have no lawyers in my family. I initially thought it'd be fun to be an international diplomat because I always wanted to travel internationally when I was a kid. I went to Georgetown’s School of Foreign Service in Washington, D.C. – one of the best schools you could go to for being a diplomat. But, I quickly realized that the life of a foreign service officer was not for me.

Fortunately, I had an incredible professor who taught an undergraduate course in international law and also taught classes at Georgetown’s law school. He encouraged me to take his class and I absolutely loved it. I was fascinated by how various international laws interacted, but more important, how lawyers think. Going to Georgetown and being in Washington cemented two things in my mind: One is I really wanted to be a lawyer, and two is I wasn’t ready to leave Texas, I really missed it.

So, I went to the University of Texas for law school. I had a great time and learned a lot about the law and how to think like a lawyer. From there, I interviewed broadly across many firms, including in New York, London and Texas. I was introduced to Susman Godfrey as a summer associate and quickly realized it was where I wanted to practice. I saw early on that it was very entrepreneurial, a firm where you could really build a practice.

I then clerked for a year in Puerto Rico on the 1st Circuit, and then returned to Texas to litigate at Susman. I tried to get as many in-court opportunities as I possibly could. Anytime there was an opportunity to go to trial or to stand up at a hearing, I would take it.

I tried to get as many in-court opportunities as I possibly could. Anytime there was an opportunity to go to trial or to stand up at a hearing, I would take it.

LD: Susman has really grown since you started, would you say they still have that entrepreneurial mindset now?

SR: Absolutely. That's one of the reasons I loved moving to New York to help grow the office. I thought I'd never leave Texas again, but I loved the opportunity to build an office. And that entrepreneurial feel is still a big part of the firm to this day.

LD: What was it like building out a new office in New York?

SR: It was great. We immediately had two advantages that set us apart from other firms. First, we did not represent banks, which is something that's rare in New York and so we were getting a lot of referrals. And, second, New York lawyers typically don't go to trial very much, whereas in Texas, we went to trial a ton. So, there was a very limited number of lawyers in New York that had a lot of experience trying cases to juries. And because of that, and our ability to sue banks and big financial institutions, we had far more work than we could ever do in a year.

We quickly started growing the New York office, and we still haven't hit a saturation point. We encourage our young lawyers to bring in business, and because we rarely work by the hour, we're able to put together fee deals and other alternative fee arrangements that clients love. I don't really believe in the hourly billing model. My success hinges entirely on the success of the case. When my clients win, I win. If my clients lose, I lose. I love that.

Other than maybe politics or professional sports, litigation is one of the only careers where, at the end of the day, there's a winner and a loser. I love the competition of litigation.

LD: Do you consider yourself a generalist in your practice?

SR: Yes, I consider myself a generalist in terms of topic areas, but a specialist in terms of presenting those topics to a judge or jury. It is far easier to learn a new subject than it is to learn how to effectively present a case to a judge or a jury. Currently, my biggest cases involve the laws of Taiwan, privacy rights, breach of contract, and complex antitrust law. That’s something I love about litigation – you get to learn new industries and learn about various things that I previously had no idea about, and then figure out how to explain those concepts to a judge or a jury.

I am often brought in right before trials because we have that unique expertise. Getting a case through discovery and into trial is what we specialize in, which really sets us apart from other lawyers.

LD: Is there a trial from early on in your career that made you think – this is what I’m made for?

SR: My first trial was a state class action in Minnesota. We were on the defense side representing Walmart, and it was particularly memorable because I was tasked with building our trial witnesses, and that meant that I had to visit every Walmart in the state of Minnesota to interview potential witnesses – the employees. It was fascinating because it made me understand and appreciate the human side of litigation. These people were incredible – outrageously smart. They worked themselves up from bagging groceries to being the managers of these stores. Learning their stories was fascinating. Then, from the legal aspect, figuring out how to take their stories and turn them into a trial presentation was amazing.

This case was the most memorable because, as luck would have it, the first witness in this several month trial was someone I was assigned to cross examine. The courthouse was filled with media, and I realized walking up to the podium that all of the eyes were on me and I had never even seen a cross-examination in court before – much less conducted one. It went exactly how I had hoped it would – the witness gave me great admissions that set the tone for the rest of the case. It was very rewarding having had the opportunity to build the case from the start and then taking it through to a trial and then a judgment that was extremely favorable for our client.

LD: You’ve been with Susman 20 years now, right?

SR: Yes, ever since I finished my clerkship.

I am often brought in right before trials because we have that unique expertise. Getting a case through discovery and into trial is what we specialize in, which really sets us apart from other lawyers.

LD: Is it true that Susman requires lawyers to have done a clerkship before they’ll hire them?

SR: Yes! At Susman we require every lawyer to clerk for a federal judge before we'll hire them. We believe learning how the judicial system works is the best way to figure out how to pitch a case to a judge and explain it in a way that makes sense. When clerking, you read a ton of briefs, see a lot of oral arguments, and then you get to see from inside the chambers what persuaded a judge to rule a certain way. That experience is so valuable as a practicing lawyer. I'd encourage anyone that can do it to clerk. Getting the chance to see how the judicial process works from the inside will make you a fantastic lawyer. It’s such a valuable tool.

LD: Can you tell us about a recent trial that was particularly fun or memorable?

SR: I tried a case a few years ago in the Southern District of New York before Judge Lorna Schofield. It was a jury trial where we represented General Electric as a plaintiff against an entity called the Nebraska Investment Finance Authority. We were brought in to replace another big New York firm who was not as confident in the case as we were.

It was essentially a breach of contract case where the facts were extremely complicated and extremely boring. It involved guaranteed financial contracts – the details of them would put anyone to sleep quickly, and we had to find a way to make it interesting and fun for the jury to understand our theory. It ended up being riveting and fun for the jury. We held a four-day trial and won an outstanding verdict valued at over $160M. Several of the jury members came up to us at the end of the trial to say how much fun they had, and thanked us for making their jury service interesting

LD: What do you appreciate about Susman as a platform for your work?

SR: Steve Susman built the firm with the view that the firm was your family, and he really meant it. Both Steve and Lee Godfrey’s kids became partners in the firm. They always had that mentality of including your family in the firm and having the firm as part of your family. Steve believed that your work takes commitment and sacrifice, and when your whole family is committed to it, it’s a successful venture. My best friends are people within our firm because we spend so much time together and we really enjoy each other's company.

Jumping back to building the New York office – it was important for me to bring that mentality up here. Anyone we hire for our office – attorneys, receptionists, support staff – I will meet before we hire them. I really want to make sure we continue that family atmosphere. It's so important to me to maintain that tradition that Steve started.

LD: What advice would you offer a young person who wants to be a trial lawyer?

SR: I want to say not to take your work home with you, but I always do. I think about my cases all the time, I think about ways I could do better for the case, and because I feel ownership of it, I want my clients to succeed, and I really want to succeed. And I've found that when young lawyers similarly take ownership of what they're doing and care about it, their work product is just outrageously that much better. So that's probably the first thing – care about what you are doing.

The second thing I always tell people is take advantage of every opportunity you can to work with as many exceptional lawyers as you can. When I hear about a big trial that's going on, I will run down to the courthouse to watch it to see how other lawyers present their cases to a jury. You can constantly learn from talented trial lawyers and their different approaches. Maintaining that thirst for learning is important.

The last thing I’d say is get yourself out there. I learned quickly that going to bar events wasn't my cup of tea – I didn't love the mingling aspect. But you can find something you love, like a charity or some activity that gets you out to meet new people, tell them about what you do, and that eventually generates business. It takes time, but it comes.

LD: Any advice for a Texas litigator looking to make the move to New York?

SR: The question I faced when I came up here was, "Can a Texas litigator make it in New York City?” Would the trial skills translate? What I soon found is not only do they translate, but I had an advantage because I had so much trial experience and trial experience is a rare asset that is useful in any courtroom regardless of location. Now I do a ton of work in New York’s Commercial Division and in trial courts across the country, including Delaware’s Chancery Court as that is where some of the biggest cases in America are often filed. So my advice is – do not look at such a move as a climb up a learning curve, rather think about the skills you have that will set you apart in the courtroom.