How hard is it to do CLE?

May 18, 2010
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

IL reporter Rebecca Berfanger contributed today’s blog post.

Do you recognize anyone you know on this list?

It’s the annual order of suspension of attorneys who haven’t paid their registration fees on time and/or they haven’t completed the required number of CLE hours.

The full list of 256 suspended attorneys licensed to practice in Indiana was issued May 14 and posted online today.

While looking at the list as a staff, we noticed attorneys who’ve been in the news recently for good and bad reasons, at least one judge, and 112 attorneys with out of state addresses.

As for the 144 attorneys listed with Indiana addresses: 105 lawyers were behind on registration fees, and 67 didn’t meet CLE requirements. Mixed in with those two groups were 28 lawyers who didn’t do either.

These numbers do not include the attorneys who have asked for and have been granted extensions to fulfill these requirements, according to the order.

Every year I wonder how so many attorneys slip by without meeting these seemingly simple requirements.

Even as a non-attorney I often see notices about CLE courses: I hear about pro bono districts that provide free CLE in exchange for taking on a case or participating in a Talk to a Lawyer Today program; county bar association newsletters include prominently placed CLE calendars; the law school events calendars I check for story ideas often offer CLE credits for specialized topics; and of course ICLEF’s website has links to CLE events.

And just in case you missed it, IL daily has a link to our CLE calendar at the bottom of every e-mail we send.

I also often hear from sources that CLE is expensive and not always easy to fit into one’s schedule of trials and client meetings, but I’ve yet to hear a source tell me there’s any reason they do not do it.

If your name is on here – what’s your excuse?
 

ADVERTISEMENT
Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
  1. It appears the police and prosecutors are allowed to change the rules halfway through the game to suit themselves. I am surprised that the congress has not yet eliminated the right to a trial in cases involving any type of forensic evidence. That would suit their foolish law and order police state views. I say we eliminate the statute of limitations for crimes committed by members of congress and other government employees. Of course they would never do that. They are all corrupt cowards!!!

  2. Poor Judge Brown probably thought that by slavishly serving the godz of the age her violations of 18th century concepts like due process and the rule of law would be overlooked. Mayhaps she was merely a Judge ahead of her time?

  3. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  4. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

  5. You can put your photos anywhere you like... When someone steals it they know it doesn't belong to them. And, a man getting a divorce is automatically not a nice guy...? That's ridiculous. Since when is need of money a conflict of interest? That would mean that no one should have a job unless they are already financially solvent without a job... A photographer is also under no obligation to use a watermark (again, people know when a photo doesn't belong to them) or provide contact information. Hey, he didn't make it easy for me to pay him so I'll just take it! Well heck, might as well walk out of the grocery store with a cart full of food because the lines are too long and you don't find that convenient. "Only in Indiana." Oh, now you're passing judgement on an entire state... What state do you live in? I need to characterize everyone in your state as ignorant and opinionated. And the final bit of ignorance; assuming a photo anyone would want is lucky and then how much does your camera have to cost to make it a good photo, in your obviously relevant opinion?

ADVERTISEMENT