Category: Uncategorized
Judge Takes County to Task
Judge Takes County to
Task Over Sweltering Courtrooms
Complications in courtroom proceedings can make people a
little hot under the collar. In one Detroit courthouse last week, everyone was
hot under the collar when the temperature inside the building reached 90
degrees.
A thunderstorm knocked out electricity to the Lincoln Hall
of Justice, and a massive generator was brought in to run the lights. Portable
“chiller” units were brought in to provide air conditioning, but they
didn’t work. It was so hot inside the building that children who were being
transported to the courthouse for hearings had to wait for hours in air-conditioned
vans in the parking lot because the holding cells were too hot.
County officials had no solution except to cancel court the
next day. One fed-up judge took to Facebook to vent her frustrations, pointing
out that in addition to the disservice cancelation does to the public, it
doesn’t help the hundreds of employees who were still expected to work in the
sweltering building. She wrote:
“It is a shame
that we have to continue to work in these conditions. It is even more shameful
that we ask the public to come to court and sit in crowded hallways of a
terrible building with no air.
“The remedy: we can
cancel our dockets. But how does this serve the public? My clerk can’t leave,
my sheriff can’t leave, my court reporter can’t leave. And more importantly,
the people who have cases today would be unfairly disadvantaged b/c they have
made their way to the court only to find out that the judge canceled the docket
because it was too hot. People want their kids returned to their care,
their kids released from placement, a chance to address bond, they want their
cases heard.”
Unfortunately, fixing the air conditioning won’t solve the problem.
Court staff say the building has major electrical issues, is in disrepair, and
the county has no plans to renovate or move to a different building. After the
judge’s social media posts, though, it wouldn’t be surprising if the condition
of court facilities or access to justice for all residents of Detroit becomes a
big local issue.
Massachusets Does Away with Court Reporters
Massachusetts Does
Away With Court Reporters
As of the end of June, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts has
“scrapped” its court reporters and is now almost solely using digital
recording systems in its courtrooms.
In the midst of a nationwide court reporter shortage,
multiple states have faced tough decisions regarding methods of capturing the
official courtroom record. Massachusetts court officials say the shortage had
nothing to do with their decision. They began placing digital recording systems
in courtrooms in 2009, and this year’s move was an upgrade and expansion of
that system.
Some prosecutors and criminal defense attorneys look at the
move with skepticism, as reported in the Boston
Globe:
“Our main concern is that we have a
complete and accurate record of everything that is said in a courtroom without
any mistakes, because one error or an unnoticed malfunctioning
of a taping system can do irreparable harm,” said Melissa Dineen, a managing
director in the public defenders division at the Committee for Public Counsel
Services.
Norfolk District Attorney Michael
Morrissey said court reporters interrupt when they can’t hear clearly and ask
speakers to repeat themselves. If a proceeding gets interrupted, court
reporters can quickly read back the last question, he said.
“The electronic devices have been
getting better over the years but I don’t believe they are a substitute for
court reporters,” said Morrissey.
Other attorneys expressed concerns that the digital system
could malfunction without anyone noticing, or that witnesses shuffling papers
or talking over attorneys could create an inaudible portion of the record.
Court officials have hired “court monitors” who
will operate the recording equipment and monitor it for any malfunctions. The
average annual salary for a court monitor is approximately $18,000 a year less
than a court reporter’s salary. Court administrators are able to assign court
reporters to some criminal proceedings, including murder or rape trials. In
that instance the independent court reporter would be paid a per diem of
$250.64, $80 less than a salaried court reporter’s daily rate.
Martin Healy, chief legal counsel for the Massachusetts Bar
Association, said he was “initially alarmed by the decision to phase out
court reporters, but has been convinced over many years and many meetings that
the system was working.”
Digital court reporters are being increasingly used in
courtrooms and deposition suites, and with good reason. The bottom line is that
the skill and professionalism of the reporter capturing the record is more important
than the method used.
At Legal Media Experts, we proudly utilize the latest
technology in stenotype, voice writing, and digital court reporting to ensure
an accurate record. Schedule your deposition or hearing online today.
Indigent Plaintiffs in California Now Provided with a Court Reporter
Indigent Plaintiffs in California Now Provided With a Court
Reporter
As guardians of the record, court reporters are extremely
mindful of the importance of an accurate record. We know that deposition
transcripts are frequently used at trial and how crucial
it is that the transcript reflects the exact words spoken by the witness. The
quality of a transcript can make or break an attorney’s case.
Transcripts of court proceedings are just as important. The
transcript represents an impartial, verbatim record of what was said in the
courtroom and allows appellate courts to make a determination about whether
both parties received a fair trial.
In criminal cases, in which one’s liberty is at stake, the
court provides legal counsel and a trial transcript for appeal if the defendant
is indigent. For civil cases, though, plaintiffs are on their own. Even if they
qualify for a fee waiver and aren’t required to pay court filing fees, if they
end up on the losing side of a motion or trial they have to pay full market
rates for a verbatim transcript to use on appeal. If they don’t have resources
available to pay a court reporter, they can
For California residents that’s about to change, courtesy of
a new California Supreme Court ruling. Barry Jameson sued Dr. Taddese Desta for
medical malpractice. During the next 10 years, Jameson’s case was dismissed by
the trial court three times, and every time appeals courts sent the case back
(reversed and remanded).
The case was called for trial in 2014. At the end of
Jameson’s opening statement Dr. Desta’s counsel made a motion for nonsuit,
which was granted. When Jameson appealed the California Court of Appeals
decided against him and cited the lack of a verbatim transcript. Jameson then
requested that the California Supreme Court review the case, arguing that he
was denied access to justice because his financial status precluded him from
having a court reporter prepare a verbatim transcript.
In a ruling released July 5, the California Supreme Court
agreed. Chief Justice TaniCantil-Sakauye wrote (emphasis added):
“By precluding an indigent litigant
from obtaining the attendance of an official court reporter (to which the litigant
would be entitled without payment of a fee), while at the same time preserving
the right of financially able litigants to obtain an officially recognized pro
tempore court reporter, the challenged court policy creates the type of
restriction of meaningful access to the civil judicial process that the
relevant California in forma pauperis precedents and legislative policy render
impermissible.
“Accordingly, we conclude that the
court policy in question is invalid as applied to plaintiff and other fee
waiver recipients, and that an official
court reporter, or other valid means to create an official verbatim record for
purposes of appeal, must generally be made available to in forma pauperis
litigants upon request.”
Jameson’s attorney, Michael Shipley, said:
“Access to justice is a huge civil
rights issue and we had 40 different organizations that either filed or joined
amicus briefs because this issue was affecting in a negative way all kinds of
people’s rights to petition the government for redress of their grievances.”
Court officials noted that their budgets had been cut
drastically over the last 10 years and that it wasn’t an issue of not wanting
to provide Jameson with a court reporter; it was an issue of not having the
funding. They said they would comply with the ruling, though, and re-evaluate
their procedures.
To schedule a court
reporter for a deposition or hearing, please call Legal Media Experts at 800-446-1387
Who Owns a Court Reporter’s Notes
Are Court Reporters Obligated to
Provide an Audio Backup?
As we know,
a deposition transcript captures the proceedings verbatim. What it can’t
capture is the attorney’s or witness’s tone of voice, or whether a participant
is laughing, or crying. Most of the time that doesn’t really matter, but in an
especially contentious case, those types
of issues can be relevant. In such cases attorneys sometimes request any audio
backup the court reporter may have available.
Which brings
us to the question: Are attorneys entitled to receive a copy of backup audio
media?
The short
answer is, no. The official record of the deposition is the transcript, and
court reporters (or court reporting firms) are not obligated to release backup
audio media. If there is a request for the audio and the firm decides to grant
it, the National Court Reporters Association has developed guidelines for doing
so:
1. If the backup audio media is made
available to any party in a case, it is the responsibility of the reporter to
ensure that no confidential or off-the-record discussions are contained in the
released recording.
2. A reporting firm/agency may not require
that a reporter produce the backup audio media (unless ordered to do so by a
court).
3. If the reporter decides to release
the backup audio media, the reporter shall release a copy and not the original
(unless ordered otherwise by a court).
4. If the reporter makes available a
copy of the backup audio media to one party, the same offer must be made to the
other party(ies) to the proceeding.
5. Reporters should check all applicable
local, state and federal laws, rules and regulations to ensure that creating a
backup audio media is in compliance with those laws, rules and regulations.
6. If a reporter uses backup audio
media, it should be preserved upon request by any party to the proceeding for
the same period of time for which the reporter’s notes are preserved. The
reporter may request that the party seek a court order before making it
available.
If an
attorney anticipates wanting an audio recording of a particular deposition,
they can create their own – provided they’ve followed the applicable Rules of
Civil Procedure in that jurisdiction.
Court Reporter’s bag of tricks
In the court reporting field anything – anything – can happen. Any seasoned court reporter could regale you with deposition or courtroom stories that would make your head spin. If a court reporter attempted to write a movie script using real-life examples, they’d probably be accused of making them up.
Like their Hollywood counterparts, court reporters believe in the saying “The show must go on,” so they come to depositions prepared to deal with a variety of situations.
Just what do they carry in their bag of tricks? Here’s a list we’ve compiled from our court reporters, which may vary depending on which method they use to capture the record.
-
Steno machine and tripod (or stenomask and digital recording equipment)
-
Laptop with CAT software
-
Realtime delivery equipment (router, cables)
-
iPads or other tablets for clients to view realtime
-
Microphones
-
Web cameras
-
Extension cords and power strips
-
Chargers and adapters (for phones, laptops, and more)
-
USB and HDMI cables
-
USB hub
-
SD cards and thumb drives
-
Exhibit stickers
-
Manila folders
-
Post-it notes
-
Batteries
-
Energy bar/Nuts/Chocolate
-
Gum/breath mints
-
Water
-
Hand sanitizer, Clorox wipes
-
WiFi hotspot or MiFi card
-
Ethernet cable
-
Gaffer’s tape (for taping down cords)
-
Cell phone (for a calendar or backup recording app)
-
Cough drops or Vitamin C drops
-
Ibuprofen
-
Paper clip, binder clips
-
Notepads
-
Small stapler, staple remover
-
Pens and Sharpies in varying colors
We’ve also heard of reporters who carry a first aid kit with them after a witness got a gushing paper cut during a deposition. Some of the items might be a little surprising, but they’ve all been necessary at one point or another. Just ask the court reporter at your next deposition!
Schedule your next deposition with Legal Media Experts today, using our easy online form or calling 800-446-1387
Whose Reporter Is This Anyway
In business, customer service is paramount. The person who pays is the person whose opinion and wants matter. “The customer is always right” is the credo of successful companies.
In court reporting, however, it’s different. Though one firm books the court reporter for a deposition or hearing, the court reporter’s loyalties don’t lie with that firm or party. All court reporters – whether official or freelance, whether stenotype or stenomask or electronic – are impartial guardians of the record and officers of the court.
Ethical standards vary by jurisdiction and licensing authority, but we’ve listed below a set of common standards:
-
Be fair and impartial toward each participant in all aspects of reported proceedings and always offer to provide comparable services to all parties in a proceeding.
-
Be alert to situations that are conflicts of interest or that may give the appearance of a conflict of interest. If a conflict or a potential conflict arises, the court reporter shall disclose that conflict or potential conflict.
-
Guard against not only impropriety, but the appearance of impropriety.
-
Preserve the confidentiality and ensure the security of information, oral or written, entrusted to the court reporter by any of the parties in a proceeding.
-
Be truthful and accurate when making public statements or when advertising the court reporter’s qualifications or the services provided.
-
Determine fees independently from other firms.
-
Refrain from giving, directly or indirectly, any gift or anything of value to attorneys or their staff, other clients or their staff, or any persons or entities associated with any litigation.
The common thread is that a court reporter/firm is required to treat each side equally and produce a true, accurate, and complete transcript of proceedings.
Sometimes court reporters are put in an awkward position by an attorney who thinks the reporter is “their” reporter. They might ask for their transcript to be delivered on an expedited basis and for the reporter to not let the other side know that it had been expedited. They might ask for a discount on services if they book the firm to take all of the depositions in a case. On their face those requests don’t seem horribly wrong, but give the appearance of favoritism.
On rare occasions, attorneys have asked court reporters to attempt to listen to conversations between opposing counsel and the witness during breaks. That’s obviously an extreme example, and the vast majority of attorneys would never ask a reporter to do such a thing. But if a reporter or firm has given the attorney small favors in the past – such as the type mentioned in the preceding paragraph – it sets a precedent where bigger “favors” will be requested.
At Legal Media Experts we take our ethical responsibilities very seriously, remembering that while the attorneys are our customers, we are officers of the court and impartial guardians of the record.
Technology is Solving the Court Reporter Shortage
With each leap forward in technology, there are two extremes in reaction – the early adopter and the stubborn resistor. We all know someone who still has a flip phone, right? That is, if they even have a mobile phone at all.
In the field of court reporting, there are few early adopters for a couple of reasons. Fear of being replaced by a new technology keeps some people from even looking into the benefits it might bring. And if there is a flaw in the new technology, the early adopters are the ones who have to deal with the ramifications.
Court reporting is overrepresented at the other end of the spectrum, too, with firms and reporters who stubbornly, and sometimes irrationally, resist researching or implementing new technology.
At Legal Media Experts, we’ve always been cautious early adopters. We seek out new technologies that can help us streamline the transcript production process or add value for our clients, but only implement them company-wide after successful trials and a process of “working out the kinks.”
Because of this mindset, we have a full staff of qualified reporters despite a shortage of stenographic court reporters. Instead of clinging to traditional methods of capturing the record, we led the way in implementing electronic reporting, developing training modules and procedures to ensure that each transcript our firm produces meets our standards – regardless of the court reporter’s method.
Electronic reporting won’t reduce court reporting to a profession where one simply hits the “record” button, as some had feared. A complete, accurate transcript still needs to be prepared, and a qualified, professional reporter is still a necessary part of deposition proceedings. The technology, however, severely decreases the time it takes a new court reporter to be “deposition ready,” thereby alleviating a massive shortage of qualified, professional reporters.
We are proud to be at the forefront of implementing new technologies and perfecting their use in the court reporting industry. To schedule a deposition with Legal Media Experts, click here or call 800-446-1387