IBJNews

Court: Celadon 'general counsel' lacks license, can't practice law

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A top executive of Celadon Group Inc. can no longer represent himself as the Indianapolis-based trucking company’s attorney because of a glaring omission—he is not licensed to practice law in Indiana.

Kenneth L. Core, who used the title of "vice president of risk management and general counsel" in letters and electronic correspondence, is prohibited from practicing in the state until he obtains a law license, according to a March 12 Indiana Supreme Court order.

Core, who earned $191,584 in total compensation last year, is Celadon's fifth-highest-paid executive, according to the company’s most recent proxy statement. His formal title is vice president and secretary.

The Supreme Court order stems from an Oct. 22 filing from the state’s Disciplinary Commission alleging Core had engaged in the unauthorized practice of law.

Core agreed to a settlement, in which he is prohibited from “holding himself out as ‘counsel,’ ‘general counsel,’ or any other title suggesting his status as an attorney licensed in Indiana to provide legal advice and legal services … unless and until such time as he obtains a license to practice law in Indiana.”

He formerly practiced law in Iowa between 1975 and 1993. The state suspended his law license in 1993 for failing to pay its annual license fee and for failing to comply with its continuing legal education requirements, the Supreme Court order said.

Core admitted to the Disciplinary Commission that he is not licensed to practice in Indiana and provided evidence that Celadon was aware that he lacked the credentials to do so.
 
Paul Will, Celadon’s vice chairman and chief financial officer, referred to Core’s mistake as a “misunderstanding.”

“The resolution is that he just needs to get his CLE credits in Iowa so that he can get his Indiana [law] license,” he said. “It’s kind of a slap-on-the-wrist formality.”

Will further said an individual who had a dispute with the company pressed the issue and filed the complaint.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

  • re
    Marsha,

    I cannot believe you are worried about the Celadon pseudo counsel when you have a county prosecutor who appears to be on the take.Have you filed a complaint against him? That's the kind of guy who makes lawyers look bad.

    Get your priorities straight!
  • License
    Core's failure to know the rules for practice in Indiana is more than a "misunderstanding" It is arrogant and irresponsible. Companies around the country bring in General Counsel from other states. The first thing a new GC does is make sure he/she can practice in the state where they just relocated. Core, who according to the article, hasn't been responsible enough to maintain his legal license since 1993 doesn't deserve to call himself counsel, and definitely not general counsel. The actions of the Commission and the Court are appropriate. Celedon should start a search for a new GC.
  • Here are two lawyers who need jobs!
    Well, now that we all know Tim's source of funding has dried up he's going to need a job...and Carl, well, i don't know who would hire him but it sure looks like he needs a job too. They both have law licenses!
  • ha ha ha
    ha! you funny. a lawyer that "plays by the rules"? kma!
  • Rules are for others
    Its very common for large companies to have out of state general counsels come to Indiana and pretend they can practice law. I think this is a very proper ruling by the court.
  • Lawyer
    I have my Indiana license, and over 18 years of experience. Hire me, Celadon!
  • Unlicensed Lawyer
    It's hardly a formality when this guy apparently has not been licensed to practice law anywhere for more than 16 years. He's the kind of person who gives the rest of us - attorneys who play by the rules - a bad name.

    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 IBJ 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

    facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

    Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
    Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
     
    Subscribe to IBJ
    1. By Mr. Lee's own admission, he basically ran pro-bono ads on the billboard. Paying advertisers didn't want ads on a controversial, ugly billboard that turned off customers. At least one of Mr. Lee's free advertisers dropped out early because they found that Mr. Lee's advertising was having negative impact. So Mr. Lee is disingenous to say the city now owes him for lost revenue. Mr. Lee quickly realized his monstrosity had a dim future and is trying to get the city to bail him out. And that's why the billboard came down so quickly.

    2. Merchants Square is back. The small strip center to the south of 116th is 100% leased, McAlister’s is doing well in the outlot building. The former O’Charleys is leased but is going through permitting with the State and the town of Carmel. Mac Grill is closing all of their Indy locations (not just Merchants) and this will allow for a new restaurant concept to backfill both of their locations. As for the north side of 116th a new dinner movie theater and brewery is under construction to fill most of the vacancy left by Hobby Lobby and Old Navy.

    3. Yes it does have an ethics commission which enforce the law which prohibits 12 specific items. google it

    4. Thanks for reading and replying. If you want to see the differentiation for research, speaking and consulting, check out the spreadsheet I linked to at the bottom of the post; it is broken out exactly that way. I can only include so much detail in a blog post before it becomes something other than a blog post.

    5. 1. There is no allegation of corruption, Marty, to imply otherwise if false. 2. Is the "State Rule" a law? I suspect not. 3. Is Mr. Woodruff obligated via an employment agreement (contractual obligation) to not work with the engineering firm? 4. In many states a right to earn a living will trump non-competes and other contractual obligations, does Mr. Woodruff's personal right to earn a living trump any contractual obligations that might or might not be out there. 5. Lawyers in state government routinely go work for law firms they were formally working with in their regulatory actions. You can see a steady stream to firms like B&D from state government. It would be interesting for IBJ to do a review of current lawyers and find out how their past decisions affected the law firms clients. Since there is a buffer between regulated company and the regulator working for a law firm technically is not in violation of ethics but you have to wonder if decisions were made in favor of certain firms and quid pro quo jobs resulted. Start with the DOI in this review. Very interesting.

    ADVERTISEMENT