ILNews

Orzeske: How to stay in good standing with your CLE requirements

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Indiana Lawyer Focus

By Julia Orzeske, John D. Ulmer and Shontrai Irving

Indiana’s attorneys are subject to a mandatory continuing legal education requirement. Each attorney, in order to stay active and in good standing on the Indiana Roll of Attorneys, must complete a minimum of six hours of CLE per calendar year and a minimum of 36 hours by Dec. 31 of the third year of repeating three-year education periods. Newly admitted attorneys must complete six hours of an Applied Professionalism Course that counts toward both their annual and three-year requirement. These newly admitted attorneys who successfully complete a three-year education period are then considered veteran attorneys: the applied professionalism requirement is replaced by a three-hour ethics requirement which must be completed at any time in repeating three-year education periods.

Every year, before Sept. 1, attorneys are sent a transcript showing their continuing legal education activities for the current year and three-year education period. Once this is received, the attorneys are responsible for correcting any errors and completing any unfulfilled requirements before Dec. 31 of the current year.

The transcript is sent to the attorneys at the address designated by the attorney on the Roll of Attorneys’ portal. It is wise to check information early in the summer (now) because the annual attorney registration fee process will soon begin. If an attorney’s contact information is not kept current, there is a possibility the registration fee information will be sent to the wrong email address for the attorney and that the CLE transcript will be sent to the wrong home or work address. It is important to note that it is solely the attorney’s responsibility to enter, verify and monitor this contact information, and “a failure to do so is a waiver of notice involving licenses as attorneys and/or disciplinary matters.” Admission and Discipline Rule 2, Sec. (a). Please take the time now to review your contact information on the Roll of Attorneys portal at https://courtapps.in.gov/rollofattorneys.

The Commission for Continuing Legal Education has a searchable database on www.in.gov/judiciary/cle/ to help attorneys choose courses that have already been approved by the commission. If there is a course an attorney is interested in attending that is not listed, the attorney should complete an application for accreditation to the commission to receive an approval decision before spending substantial time and resources on the course. The commission currently has about a 30-day turn around on course applications.

There are also FAQs on the website. The commission deals with questions that arise in its areas of responsibility addressed by Admission and Discipline Rule 28 (Continuing Judicial Education), Admission and Discipline Rule 29 (Continuing Legal Education), Admission and Discipline Rule 30 (Attorney Specialization) and the Alternative Dispute Resolution Rules (Mediation training and registry). Please contact the commission with any questions at 317-232-1943 or cle@courts.in.gov.•

__________

Julia Orzeske has been executive director of the Commission for Continuing Legal Education since 1994. John D. Ulmer is chair of the commission and of counsel with Yoder Ainlay Ulmer & Buckingham LLP in Goshen. Shontrai Irving is a commission member and an attorney with State Farm. The opinions expressed are those of the authors.

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. Whilst it may be true that Judges and Justices enjoy such freedom of time and effort, it certainly does not hold true for the average working person. To say that one must 1) take a day or a half day off work every 3 months, 2) gather a list of information including recent photographs, and 3) set up a time that is convenient for the local sheriff or other such office to complete the registry is more than a bit near-sighted. This may be procedural, and hence, in the near-sighted minds of the court, not 'punishment,' but it is in fact 'punishment.' The local sheriffs probably feel a little punished too by the overwork. Registries serve to punish the offender whilst simultaneously providing the public at large with a false sense of security. The false sense of security is dangerous to the public who may not exercise due diligence by thinking there are no offenders in their locale. In fact, the registry only informs them of those who have been convicted.

  2. Unfortunately, the court doesn't understand the difference between ebidta and adjusted ebidta as they clearly got the ruling wrong based on their misunderstanding

  3. A common refrain in the comments on this website comes from people who cannot locate attorneys willing put justice over retainers. At the same time the judiciary threatens to make pro bono work mandatory, seemingly noting the same concern. But what happens to attorneys who have the chumptzah to threatened the legal status quo in Indiana? Ask Gary Welch, ask Paul Ogden, ask me. Speak truth to power, suffer horrendously accordingly. No wonder Hoosier attorneys who want to keep in good graces merely chase the dollars ... the powers that be have no concerns as to those who are ever for sale to the highest bidder ... for those even willing to compromise for $$$ never allow either justice or constitutionality to cause them to stand up to injustice or unconstitutionality. And the bad apples in the Hoosier barrel, like this one, just keep rotting.

  4. I am one of Steele's victims and was taken for $6,000. I want my money back due to him doing nothing for me. I filed for divorce after a 16 year marriage and lost everything. My kids, my home, cars, money, pension. Every attorney I have talked to is not willing to help me. What can I do? I was told i can file a civil suit but you have to have all of Steelers info that I don't have. Of someone can please help me or tell me what info I need would be great.

  5. It would appear that news breaking on Drudge from the Hoosier state (link below) ties back to this Hoosier story from the beginning of the recent police disrespect period .... MCBA president Cassandra Bentley McNair issued the statement on behalf of the association Dec. 1. The association said it was “saddened and disappointed” by the decision not to indict Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson for shooting Michael Brown. “The MCBA does not believe this was a just outcome to this process, and is disheartened that the system we as lawyers are intended to uphold failed the African-American community in such a way,” the association stated. “This situation is not just about the death of Michael Brown, but the thousands of other African-Americans who are disproportionately targeted and killed by police officers.” http://www.thestarpress.com/story/news/local/2016/07/18/hate-cops-sign-prompts-controversy/87242664/

ADVERTISEMENT