Connecticut Law Tribune
  • Home
  • News
  • Decisions
  • Columns
  • Special Issues
  • Practice Areas
  • Verdicts
  • Books
  • Lawjobs
  • Events

Home > MCLE 'Boot Camp' Proposal Meets With Opposition

Font Size: increase font decrease font

MCLE 'Boot Camp' Proposal Meets With Opposition

By JAY STAPLETON All Articles 

The Connecticut Law Tribune

February 27, 2013

  •    
  •    
  •    
  •      
 
Judge Elliot Solomon

Judge Elliot Solomon

A proposal to require new lawyers to participate in a day of career training was met with some push back this week by the Rules Committee for the Superior Court.

The proposal for a so-called "boot camp" for new lawyers came recently from a Rules Committee task force that had been looking into whether the state should adopt minimum continuing legal education for lawyers. The task force, chaired by Judge Elliot Solomon, noted deep divisions among lawyers in the state over MCLE and recommended that it's not something that should be pursued at this time.

Instead, the task force recommended creating a rule to require a basic skills course for the estimated 700 newly admitted lawyers in the state each year.

In discussing the proposal, several Rules Committee committee members expressed concerns this week about costs to run the boot camp program. That expense, they said, said would fall upon the already strapped Judicial Branch.

The program "would be free to the participants, but it wouldn't be free to the Branch," Judge Jon M. Alander said, questioning why the court system should be responsible for training lawyers

Alander wasn't convinced that requiring MCLE for just some attorneys was the right thing to do. When other committee members pointed out that Connecticut is only one of a few states that doesn't have MCLE, Alander shot back that Connecticut might be a state "that doesn't need MCLE."

"Sometimes doing nothing is better," he said, "rather than assuming responsibility for something that is someone else's responsibility."

Other Rules Committee members said voluntary CLE programs were preferable. If the mandatory programs are approved, some noted, the state would have to enforce the rule by investigating when a lawyer failed to complete the MCLE requirement.

Another Rules Committee member, Judge Barbara N. Bellis, said it was clear that the committee was far from agreeing on the topic of requiring continuing legal education for any bar member. With that in mind, the committee decided it would table the discussion until its March meeting. If the Rules Committee decides at that point to consider requiring a training day for new lawyers, a public hearing will be held in May.

If the committee then votes to adopt the rule, the matter will face a vote by the entire state bench. That meeting typically occurs in June. While that date seems a long way off, committee members acknowledged that a consensus on how to proceed is a long way off.

"It's getting down to crunch time," said state Supreme Court Justice Dennis G. Eveleigh, the committee chair.



Subscribe to The Connecticut Law Tribune

You must be signed in to comment on an article

Find similar content

Companies, agencies mentioned

    
  • Judicial Branch
  • Rules Committee

Key categories

    
  • Law Firm Administration

Most viewed stories

    
  1. Questions Raised About Legal Malpractice Policies
    •      
  2. Groups Aim To Shoot Down New State Gun Laws
    •      
  3. Court Continues To Grant Lawyers Fraud Immunity
    •         
      • Subscription Required
  4. Locker Room Injury Leads To Municipal Liability Drama
    •      
  5. Jury Convicts Former Aide To House Speaker Donovan
    •         
      • Subscription Required
lawjobs.com

TOP JOBS

MORE JOBS

POST A JOB

From the Law.com Network

Hiring Interns? Be Sure to Do It Right

ACC Weighs in on Arizona's In-House Pro Bono Rules

Ex-Dewey Partners Face New Foe in Firm's Bankruptcy

S&C Adds Linklaters Restructuring Partner in London
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Contrite Companies Can Win Forgiveness in Bribery Cases
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Plaintiffs Want to See Toyota's 'Crown Jewels'
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Enron Sandbox Stirs Up Private Data, Again

LegalTech West Coast Wraps Up With Ethics, VC News

In Tricky Prosecutions, Judges Play Peacemakers

Ropers Majeski Tries to Re-Invent Itself
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Fla. Attorneys Lead Force-Placed Insurance Fight

Lawsuit Names Missing Fla. Attorney for Alleged Fraud
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Summer Programs Still in a Drought

Lawyer Not Covered for Alleged Malpractice at Prior Firm
  •      
    • Subscription Required

The Affordable State-Specific Practice Solution
Available in NY, NJ, PA and CT editions - research, draft and prepare even the most complex cases with ease.

Firm Takes Another Hit in Bid to Collect 'Unconscionable' Fees

Martin Act Faces Big Test in Challenge to 2005 Case

Castille Testifies in Favor of 'Civil Gideon' Funding

Workers' Comp Judges Can't Fight Rescinded Raise
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Law Schools Are Looking Beyond LSATs, Says Mich. Dean

Is Freezing Your Eggs the Solution?

Advising Clients on Weather and the Workplace
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Texas Sues BP, Others Over Deepwater Oil Spill Disaster
  •      
    • Subscription Required

'Follow That Escapee!'

Judge Who Tossed Defense Counsel Accused of 'Partiality'
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Corporate Bribery Case Part Of National Trend
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Court Continues To Grant Lawyers Fraud Immunity
  •      
    • Subscription Required

  • About The Connecticut Law Tribune
  • Contact The Connecticut Law Tribune
  • Advertise with Us
  • Sitemap
  • About |
  • ALM Properties |
  • ALM Reprints |
  • Customer Support |
  • Privacy Policy |
  • Terms & Conditions |
  • ALM User License Agreement
ALM Media