More attorneys fail to pay, get CLE credit

June 5, 2008
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Is there something in the water that’s causing attorneys to disregard some of the most basic requirements of being a lawyer in Indiana? It seems more and more attorneys who practice in Indiana are having trouble meeting continuing legal education requirements or simply paying their annual registration fee.  



 



The Indiana Supreme Court has handed down its yearly suspensions of attorneys who’ve decided they don’t need to keep up on their CLE credits or pay to keep their law licenses active here, and the numbers don’t look good: more than 200 suspended for failing to pay registration fees; more than 125 were suspended because of insufficient CLE credits. 





 That’s a lot of suspensions considering just two years ago only 65 were suspended for failure to pay and 97 failed to meet CLE requirements. Even though the attorneys have about a month to pay the fees or get the CLE credits before suspension takes effect, it seems irresponsible for someone to not keep up with these basic requirements. If an attorney can’t attend CLE courses or come up with the money to pay registration fees, can’t it put doubt in a client’s mind about an attorney’s ability to handle the client’s case?
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
  1. What is this, the Ind Supreme Court thinking that there is a separation of powers and limited enumerated powers as delegated by a dusty old document? Such eighteen century thinking, so rare and unwanted by the elites in this modern age. Dictate to us, dictate over us, the massess are chanting! George Soros agrees. Time to change with times Ind Supreme Court, says all President Snows. Rule by executive decree is the new black.

  2. I made the same argument before a commission of the Indiana Supreme Court and then to the fedeal district and federal appellate courts. Fell flat. So very glad to read that some judges still beleive that evidentiary foundations matter.

  3. KUDOS to the Indiana Supreme Court for realizing that some bureacracies need to go to the stake. Recall what RWR said: "No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. Government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we'll ever see on this earth!" NOW ... what next to this rare and inspiring chopping block? Well, the Commission on Gender and Race (but not religion!?!) is way overdue. And some other Board's could be cut with a positive for State and the reputation of the Indiana judiciary.

  4. During a visit where an informant with police wears audio and video, does the video necessary have to show hand to hand transaction of money and narcotics?

  5. I will agree with that as soon as law schools stop lying to prospective students about salaries and employment opportunities in the legal profession. There is no defense to the fraudulent numbers first year salaries they post to mislead people into going to law school.

ADVERTISEMENT