|
|
 |
|
The Utah Court Reporters Association (UCRA) was formed to establish and maintain a high standard of proficiency in the profession of court reporting.
The UCRA assists Utah’s highly trained professional Court Reporters to continue to educate themselves to meet national and state requirements, as well as to keep abreast of the business, legal and technological environment.
UCRA Membership has its benefits.  Join Now!
|
|
|
Judicial Council Update Our president, Debbie Dibble, spoke to the members of the Judicial Council at their latest hearing on May 27, 2009, which was held at the Matheson Courthouse. She presented concerns of the UCRA regarding the amendments to court rules being structured by Tim Shea, Senior Staff Attorney for the Administrative Office of the Court (AOC).
The first item on the agenda for Mr. Shea, the rules for audio record of court hearings and transcripts.
AT ISSUE: Page rate of audio/digitally recorded hearings. According to Mr. Shea, the rates are publically set and fixed. Judge Chamberlain indicated that this needed to be addressed with at the Legislative level and the Judicial Council was not the proper forum for this discussion.
AT ISSUE: Filed transcripts become a public record and the property of the Court, and the Court will profit from any copy fees.
Ms. Dibble graciously reminded council members that the current page rates were set with the official reporter in mind. Officials were actually employees of the State. The State paid for everything the official reporter would need to report and produce transcripts. They were now asking the freelance reporters, who are bearing all of the costs of producing said transcript, to produce it at the same cost as the court’s once salaried and benefited employees. The current rates, coupled with the loss of copy fees and production expenses, meant a huge loss to the freelancing reporter who may be requested for capital cases. She gently reminded the council that now they have done away with their officials, they were now working with freelancers, and theses rules could no longer apply. Judge Greg Orme agreed that if a reporter would be facing the potential loss of copy rates, that perhaps they could be compensated in other ways. Dan Becker, Court Administrator, offered that the courts are just going by the rates set by the Legislature, and any changes should be addressed there.
The next item of concern, changing the rule language from “a” record to “the” record, and the problems the Court will be facing when multiple records are produced by various transcribers for the same hearing. Mr. Shea, in his argument, indicated that they were already aware of those problems, and there would continue to be a need for someone to determine which of these records would be the actual record, summarily dismissing the issue. Debbie, realizing this was of no import to them, merely pointed out that if they weren’t interested in fixing it on the front end, and were aware and willing to continue to expend the manpower and time to deal with those complications, she would move on. This led to the discussion of transcribers working under a certified court reporter and the protection of the licensed court reporter.
AT ISSUE: Will the court administrator have authority to rescind the certification of a court reporter.
Council members were concerned, once the distinction was pointed out, that this rule change seemed to infer that the court administrator would have the power to rescind a reporter’s certification. The Council asked what UCRA would suggest. The Council agreed with Debbie’s recommendation, and Judge Eyre made a motion to amend the rule change to indicate the court administrator could rescind the “authorization” of a transcriber, but would have no jurisdiction over a court reporter’s certification, whether they had done the actual work or were overseeing a transcriber. VICTORY! Mr. Shea indicated that a reporter would not held responsible to decide what an inaudible meant.
Mr. Shea also proposed that a contract would be created for confidentiality. That preparation of a record is a service. That a transcriber would be required to be a licensed court reporter, or working under the license of such reporter. He also submitted a form whereby attorneys could request a court reporter at their hearing.
Lastly, Mr. Shea said that while there have been problems with the electronic record system . . . and, he quickly added, and the court reporters . . . the complaints have been minimal, and he expected the same moving forward. Thankfully, Ms. Dibble was there to shed light on this sensitive issue; that being electronic recording has only been used on lesser cases. When cases are considered high risk for appeal, the judiciary has made sure an official court reporter has taken that record. Debbie pointed out that while these problem may have seemed minor to him, they’ve been incurred on minor cases. When they’re major cases, the problems will become major.
Ultimately, the Judicial Council passed the proposed rule amendments; however, the question is how long will it be until attorneys tire of preparing briefs and arguments from transcripts full of inaudibles? Will it affect the integrity of their work enough that it is worth the financial burden on the client to bring in their own court reporter? Which, of course, brings us full circle to the issues at hand, page rates of the capital and audio-produced hearings, and are we the public that will set those rates? UCRA will begin to investigate the possibilities and avenues available to us, and will appreciate your input as we move forward on this path. | | More Info |
|
|
