The ABC's of CLE
By Susan G. Gainey There are many consistencies in October. Halloween parties, falling leaves, colorful landscaping, colder weather, fall breaks in school and, for attorneys, the mailperson delivering a piece of blue paper from the Indiana Commission for Continuing Legal Education (ICCLE) advising the attorney of his or her CLE compliance. Although attorneys know that the paper will come in October, many are not certain exactly who the paper is coming from.
We should start by explaining who ICCLE is not. We are not ICLEF (The Indiana Continuing Legal Education Forum), who is a provider of CLE programs, although the two are often confused, possibility because our acronym is one letter off. And we are not the ISBA (Indiana State Bar Association). We forward the Holiday treats mistakenly sent to our office when they are meant for the ISBA or ICLEF. We forward program registration fees to ICLEF and bar membership questions to the ISBA. Conversely, ICLEF and the ISBA regularly forward accreditation questions to us.
ICCLE, the Commission, is a small Indiana Supreme Court Agency staffed by three full-time administrative assistants, an office manager, a part time Executive Director and a Contract attorney (who works on specialization issues). The governing body of the Commission consists of twelve Supreme Court appointees from around the state. The individuals appointed to serve have diverse practices and diverse philosophies on practicing and educating about the law. Appointees can serve two five-year terms. Our current Commission is:
Susan G. Gainey, Chair - Indianapolis
Gerald M. Bishop, Vice-Chair - Merrillville
Michael E. Tolbert, Treasurer - Merrillville
Hon. Nancy E. Boyer, Secretary - Fort Wayne
John L. Krauss, Immediate Past-Chair - Indianapolis
Commissioners
Dr. Barbara Bichelmeyer - Bloomington
Jeffry A. Lind - Terre Haute
Sandra Hamilton Miller - Indianapolis
Hon. John T. Sharpnack - Indianapolis
Jay Yeager - Indianapolis
Chuck Todd - Cambridge City
Judges ADR Committee Liaison
Hon. David J. Avery - Fort Wayne
The Commission is responsible for approving applications for CLE credit, approving sponsors who provide CLE courses, monitoring attorney’s CLE credits to ensure the attorney’s 36-hour CLE compliance over a three-year period, approving attorney specialization, and monitoring mediation education and registration. The Commission regularly meets on a bi-monthly basis to consider these issues.
With regard to CLE accreditation, the Commission recognizes sponsors of all sizes, profit or non-profit. We accept applications from individuals and sponsors for courses given inside and outside Indiana. Contrary to the belief of some non-resident attorneys, courses do not have to physically take place in Indiana. For example, we have accredited courses in China and Russia.
In 2006, Indiana Mandatory Continuing Legal Education (MCLE) marked its twentieth anniversary. The introduction of MCLE in Indiana had a marked impact on the practice of law and the changing practice of law has directly impacted CLE. In the last twenty years, the Commission has changed tremendously in terms of tasks assigned and volume. In the beginning, the Commission’s only job was to regulate Continuing Legal Education and attorney compliance with Admission and Discipline Rule 29. At that time, there were fewer than 10,000 attorneys practicing in Indiana. In 1987, the Commission reviewed roughly 650 courses for those attorneys. In fiscal year 2005-2006, the Commission reviewed over 7000 courses for over 16,000 attorneys. Also, since 1986, the Commission has become responsible for regulating specialization under Admission and Discipline Rule 30 (1995), regulating ethics credits (1996), regulating the mediation registry and mediator education under the Alternative Dispute Resolution Rules (1997), and regulating newly admitted attorney education (1999).
Mandatory Continuing Legal Education is governed by Rule 29 of the Rules of Admission and Discipline. Periodic changes by the Supreme Court to Rule 29 reflect the changing nature of the practice of law. The Commission has recognized that attorneys will take courses that will enhance the Attorney’s individual practice, but are not generally thought of as a traditional CLE course, such as torts or evidence. For example, as attorneys are required to know more and more about running a business, the Commission recognized that law firm management programs ought to be considered for credit. Additionally, attorneys who practice in highly specialized areas often are required to stay advised of accounting matters, medical developments, administrative skills, negotiations and public safety concerns. Rule 29 now allows attorneys to apply for up to 12 hours in “non legal subject hours” (NLS) toward their three–year educational period requirements if it is a course that will enhance their competence and was directed at attorneys, such as medicine or accounting directed to attorneys, but does not necessarily satisfy the requirement for traditional CLE credit.
The Supreme Court also recognized that good CLE can and does take place inside firms. As of 2005, attorneys can now report up to three hours per three-year educational period from in-house education. A word of caution, though; there are restrictions on which courses will receive in-house CLE credit. Rule 29 outlines restrictions on in-house credit, including a requirement that “the education is provided by a judge, attorney or sponsor of legal education who is not a member, employee or acting of counsel of the participating organization or law firm.”
Technology has had a significant impact on how CLE may be delivered. The availability of high quality courses via the Internet, combined with attorney’s needs to receive specific types of CLE at convenient times and places, have resulted in a fairly new amendment to the CLE Rule recognizing distance education. As of 2005, attorneys may now report up to six hours per three-year educational period in approved distance education. If the course sponsor has not already received accreditation for the course, the Attorney may apply for accreditation at least 30 days prior to the course. There are, however, limitations on which courses will be given credit, including a requirement that there must be continuing monitoring of attendance throughout the program.
Technology has also directly impacted how the Commission serves its constituents as well. Now attorneys and mediators can check their own information on-line. The Commission’s website is http://www.in.gov/judiciary/cle/. The website allows attorneys to review their own e-transcripts at any time. In the past, attorneys had to rely on the once-a-year mailing of transcripts in October, or send $5 and a written request. Attorneys can now pay annual registration fees on line and should soon be able to pay any CLE delinquency fees on-line. Attorneys and mediators can check the status of a course to see if it has been approved before they register. Attorneys and judges who attend ICLEF courses or Indiana Judicial Center Courses have their attendance reported electronically, practically on a real-time basis. We hope to soon add several other sponsors to report in this way.
Despite the rapid addition of responsibilities and services, the Commission continues to renew its commitment to the public, bench and bar. As we look to the next 20 years, it is time for us to examine our role and how we can best fulfill it. The Commission is planning a two-day facilitated meeting in June to set out a road map for the future. We will examine issues of succession planning, questions of course quality control, meaningful regulation, the best use of available resources and how to cooperate and assist when attorneys are admitted in multiple mandatory CLE states. We invite your suggestions and comments as we enter this period of self-reflections. Please send your thoughts to jorzeske@courts.state.in.us.
The article was written by Commission Chair, Susan Gainey, and Commission Executive, Julia L. Orzeske. It will appear in the February 2007 edition of Res Gestae.
|
