ILNews

Court issues UPL ruling about 'general counsel'

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Indiana Lawyer Disciplinary Actions


A top executive of Celadon Group Inc. can no longer represent himself as the Indianapolis-based trucking company's attorney because of a glaring omission - he is not licensed to practice law in Indiana.

Kenneth L. Core, who used the title of "vice president of risk management and general counsel" in letters and electronic correspondence, is prohibited from practicing in the state until he obtains a law license, according to a March 12, 2010, Indiana Supreme Court order.

Core, who earned $191,584 in total compensation last year, is Celadon's fifth-highest-paid executive, according to the company's most recent proxy statement. His formal title is vice president and secretary.

The Supreme Court order stems from an Oct. 22 filing from the state's Disciplinary Commission alleging Core had engaged in the unauthorized practice of law.

Core agreed to a settlement, in which he is prohibited from "holding himself out as 'counsel,' 'general counsel,' or any other title suggesting his status as an attorney licensed in Indiana to provide legal advice and legal services ... unless and until such time as he obtains a license to practice law in Indiana."

He formerly practiced law in Iowa between 1975 and 1993. The state suspended his law license in 1993 for failing to pay the annual license fee and for failing to comply with continuing legal education requirements, the Supreme Court order said.

Core admitted to the Disciplinary Commission that he is not licensed to practice in Indiana and provided evidence that Celadon was aware that he lacked the credentials to do so.

Paul Will, Celadon's vice chairman and chief financial officer, referred to Core's mistake as a "misunderstanding."

"The resolution is that he just needs to get his CLE credits in Iowa so that he can get his Indiana [law] license," he said. "It's kind of a slap-on-the-wrist formality."

Will further said that an individual who had a dispute with the company pressed the issue and filed the complaint.

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. Major social engineering imposed by judicial order well in advance of democratic change, has been the story of the whole post ww2 period. Contraception, desegregation, abortion, gay marriage: all rammed down the throats of Americans who didn't vote to change existing laws on any such thing, by the unelected lifetime tenure Supreme court heirarchs. Maybe people came to accept those things once imposed upon them, but, that's accommodation not acceptance; and surely not democracy. So let's quit lying to the kids telling them this is a democracy. Some sort of oligarchy, but no democracy that's for sure, and it never was. A bourgeois republic from day one.

  2. JD Massur, yes, brings to mind a similar stand at a Texas Mission in 1836. Or Vladivostok in 1918. As you seemingly gloat, to the victors go the spoils ... let the looting begin, right?

  3. I always wondered why high fence deer hunting was frowned upon? I guess you need to keep the population steady. If you don't, no one can enjoy hunting! Thanks for the post! Fence

  4. Whether you support "gay marriage" or not is not the issue. The issue is whether the SCOTUS can extract from an unmentionable somewhere the notion that the Constitution forbids government "interference" in the "right" to marry. Just imagine time-traveling to Philadelphia in 1787. Ask James Madison if the document he and his fellows just wrote allowed him- or forbade government to "interfere" with- his "right" to marry George Washington? He would have immediately- and justly- summoned the Sergeant-at-Arms to throw your sorry self out into the street. Far from being a day of liberation, this is a day of capitulation by the Rule of Law to the Rule of What's Happening Now.

  5. With today's ruling, AG Zoeller's arguments in the cases of Obamacare and Same-sex Marriage can be relegated to the ash heap of history. 0-fer

ADVERTISEMENT