Brian Rubin has received the rating of AV Preeminent.

An explanation of the Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Ratings:

AV® Preeminent™ (4.5 – 5.0) is the highest rating given. An AV® certification mark is a significant rating accomplishment – a testament to the fact that a lawyer’s peers rank him or her at the highest level of professional excellence.

BV® Distinguished™ (3.0 – 4.4) – The BV® certification mark is an excellent rating for a lawyer with some experience. A widely respected mark of achievement, it differentiates a lawyer from his or her competition.

Rated (1.0 – 2.9) – The Peer Review Rated designation demonstrates that the lawyer has met the very high criteria of General Ethical Standing.

A Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Rating reflects a combination of achieving a Very High General Ethical Standards rating and a Legal Ability numerical rating.

General Ethical Standards Rating

The General Ethical Standards rating denotes adherence to professional standards of conduct and ethics, reliability, diligence and other criteria relevant to the discharge of professional responsibilities.

Those lawyers who meet the “Very High” criteria of General Ethical Standards can proceed to the next step in the ratings process.

Legal Ability Ratings

For lawyers rated with the changed methodology, Legal Ability ratings will now indicate professional ability within a specific area of practice. Legal Ability ratings are based on performance in five key areas, rated on a scale of 1 to 5 (with 1 being the lowest and 5 being the highest). These areas are:

Legal Knowledge – Lawyer’s familiarity with the laws governing his/her specific area of practice(s); Analytical Capabilities – Lawyer’s creativity in analyzing legal issues and applying technical knowledge; Judgment – Lawyer’s demonstration of the salient factors that drive the outcome of a given case or issue.

Communication Ability – Lawyer’s capability to communicate persuasively and credibly; Legal Experience – Lawyer’s degree of experience in his/her specific area of practice(s)

Reviewer Demographics

Peer Review Ratings are anonymous and reviewers’ identities are not published, but in an effort to provide more details to the users of Peer Review Ratings, LexisNexis Martindale-Hubbell will aggregate reviewers’ basic demographics, including general position and general geographic location, which may be published with the ratings display on® and Examples of basic demographics are “private practice lawyer, senior partner, New York, USA.”

The Reviewers and Anonymity

The reviewers are members of the Bar and Judiciary (lawyers and judges) across multiple jurisdictions and geographic locations and are listed on They are from similar areas of practice and/or industry as the lawyer being rated, who know or have worked with the lawyer under review and are able to rate them on their professional ethical standards and legal ability. All Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Ratings review materials are treated as anonymous. LexisNexis Martindale-Hubbell takes steps to protect your anonymity (e.g., not associating reviewer names with their responses and aggregating their responses with responses from other reviewers before sharing or publishing them). But it is possible that their responses may contain sufficient information to allow the rated lawyer to ascertain their identity.

Facilitating the Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Ratings Process

LexisNexis Martindale-Hubbell facilitates the peer review process by gathering responses, validating them and aggregating results for display online. The content of the responses are entirely from reviewers, the peers of the lawyer. Peer reviewers must affirm that they are a peer of the lawyer identified for review. A peer can submit only one review for a specific lawyer within a 12-month period.

A lawyer’s rating will generally improve over time. But LexisNexis Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review ratings can be revised downward, or even removed if a decline is noted in ability or ethical standards. While LexisNexis Martindale-Hubbell makes available the option of regular rating reviews for the lawyers, the most recent results are relied upon when determining the final rating.