ILNews

Court not ready to create paralegal rule

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

The Indiana Supreme Court has declined to create a rule on paralegal registration for the state, putting a kink in an effort that's been under way for years.

This news is according to a Sept. 4 letter by Mishawaka attorney E. Spencer Walton Jr., chair of the Indiana State Bar Association's paralegal committee that has been studying the issue for years and drafted a Proposed Rule 2.2. In October 2006, the bar association tabled the measure for a year and in October 2007 sent a report to the court for consideration.

As it currently stands, Indiana does not have official qualifications in place for its estimated 4,000 paralegals - anyone who wishes to call himself or herself a paralegal can do so. Although the Indiana Rules of Professional Conduct govern an attorney's supervision of paralegals, there's nothing currently in place for governing these individuals directly.

Under Proposed Rule 2.2, changes would allow for the voluntary registration of paralegals under the court's supervision. The proposal outlined requirements such as good moral character, that paralegals meet an educational requirement such as a high school diploma or college degree or certain amount of paralegal work, that they receive Continuing Legal Education, and that they be under the supervision of an attorney.

"They did allow that should the professional assessment evolve over time, the Court would be open to reexamining the issue," Walton wrote in the letter to paralegal groups across the state. "Although this is not the outcome hoped for, we will continue to educate and raise awareness regarding the paralegal profession in the State of 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

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. vagueness cannot challenged, so let's write all laws vaguely and throw the constitution out the window.Even if the court is operating under a particular law, if they don't it they will change it to their liking. What a joke!!!

  2. Two convictions becomes one conviction with exactly the same sentence, only it is not clear wheter or not that sentence will be 18 months, 120 months or 138 months. Actually if the guns were in a home, whether or not they were his, he is protected under the 2nd amendment. Jurors need to learn the law and the constitution before judging others. The cour5ts need to do this as well.

  3. With all due respect, Rick, I think you probably would be making a mistake by going to law school. The job market for attorneys is so saturated, you may well find yourself unemployed and with a lot of debt. You mention law would be a good supplement to your skills. True. But employers unfortunately don't value that. You will find that a law degree may well pigeonhole you into an attorney slot and limit career options. If you have a good job now I would hold onto that. As an attorney, you may well end up making less with the aforementioned debt.

  4. Jack, I was only responding to bill's comment of tying everybody in government together. I agree with you though, it takes one bad apple to ruin the bunch.. As in any profession. What's truly unfair is when somebody violates someone's trust and takes complete advantage of someone

  5. John’s comment is unfair. The majority of attorneys can be trusted. Unfortunately, all it takes is one greedy, unscrupulous, immoral attorney to jade the public.

ADVERTISEMENT