This is a bit off topic, but interesting, at least to me. I was going over teh front page article on this site regarding CLE requirements, and I never knew there was such a difference amoung the states. Some have a ton of hours per year, others have zero. Just think its interesting because a lot of us practice in different states from time to time on a pro hac basis, I do anyway.

I think its interesting to. We don't have a cle requirement, but I imagine there are a number of business that compete for all these lawyers to help complete their cle requirement. I give the state a whole new business in the market place.

It really is an odd thing. and I have to believe in those states with CLE requirments that the people giving the courses, that it is big business. Figure each state has on average about 30,000 lawyers, and they have to attend CLE. I bet there is significant competition.

I think that CLE is positive for the profession. Most other professions like stock brokers and insurance agents have to do CLE. SO do doctors, pharmacists, and dentists.

Actually I agree with you, it is a positive thing. But, when you are in a jurisdiction that has never required it before, its hard to be thrown into it. I attend at least one seminar per year, if not more, when I find something interesting or I need to brush up on certain things. But, I can't now imagine being force to complete 15 hours per year, especially in a certain subject. I am sure that hte attorneys that have always been subject to it, just do it without a thought. Just depends on how you came up, that's all.

I think it would be a good thing. It would keep you fresh on different topics of law and learn new ones.