ILNews

Shepard offering recommendations for changing legal education to ABA

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Retired Indiana Chief Justice Randall Shepard will present the final findings and recommendations of the American Bar Association Task Force on the Future of Legal Education to the ABA House of Delegates Monday.

The task force has been working since mid-2012 and members have spoken publicly about its ideas prior to the submission of its final report in January. It had earlier released two preliminary drafts of the study and hosted open discussions as well as made presentations of its conclusions.

Members of the committee came from academia, private practice, the courts and other legal entities.

“I’ve been very encouraged by the fact that a committee with many different opinions on the topic was able to come to such a level of agreement,” Shepard said. While he noted everyone on the task force did not agree with every word in the final report, he was unsure after the early meetings that the members could reach any level of agreement.

The task force recommended a rethinking of how lawyers are trained and offered comprehensive suggestions for change.

In particular it called for a modification of accreditation standards so law schools could innovate with new curriculum and programs. Also, it questioned whether the course of study for a J.D. needs to be three years.

Maintaining that other legal organizations also share in the responsibility for teaching lawyers, the committee included recommendations for bar associations, law firms, and the courts. It urged the entities to adopt a uniform bar examination and to reduce the amount of study required to sit for the bar.

The task force also recommended allowing non-lawyers to offer limited legal services as a way to improve access to justice.

Initially, the committee had planned to tender a series of resolutions for the House of Delegates to consider. However, Shepard said as the workgroup got closer to finishing its work, it realized the report was written from the perspective of speaking directly to the institutions and the profession. So instead of investing the extra time to reshape the recommendations into resolutions, the task force decided to spend the remaining months of its mandate to make presentations to various players and hope for prompt action.

Shepard conceded not offering resolutions might weaken the proposals put forth by the committee. He has always thought getting a resolution approved by the House of Delegates was a plus, but he said the task force is hopeful the power of the ideas will carry the weight that is due them.   



 

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. Future generations will be amazed that we prosecuted people for possessing a harmless plant. The New York Times came out in favor of legalization in Saturday's edition of the newspaper.

  2. Well, maybe it's because they are unelected, and, they have a tendency to strike down laws by elected officials from all over the country. When you have been taught that "Democracy" is something almost sacred, then, you will have a tendency to frown on such imperious conduct. Lawyers get acculturated in law school into thinking that this is the very essence of high minded government, but to people who are more heavily than King George ever did, they may not like it. Thanks for the information.

  3. I pd for a bankruptcy years ago with Mr Stiles and just this week received a garnishment from my pay! He never filed it even though he told me he would! Don't let this guy practice law ever again!!!

  4. Excellent initiative on the part of the AG. Thankfully someone takes action against predators taking advantage of people who have already been through the wringer. Well done!

  5. Conour will never turn these funds over to his defrauded clients. He tearfully told the court, and his daughters dutifully pledged in interviews, that his first priority is to repay every dime of the money he stole from his clients. Judge Young bought it, much to the chagrin of Conour’s victims. Why would Conour need the $2,262 anyway? Taxpayers are now supporting him, paying for his housing, utilities, food, healthcare, and clothing. If Conour puts the money anywhere but in the restitution fund, he’s proved, once again, what a con artist he continues to be and that he has never had any intention of repaying his clients. Judge Young will be proven wrong... again; Conour has no remorse and the Judge is one of the many conned.

ADVERTISEMENT