Question for California reporters - CSRNation2024-03-28T17:57:25Zhttp://csrnation.ning.com/forum/topics/question-for-california?id=1736041%3ATopic%3A1113884&feed=yes&xn_auth=noI knew we couldn't be the onl…tag:csrnation.ning.com,2009-12-10:1736041:Comment:11149652009-12-10T03:27:22.395ZRachel Gardhttp://csrnation.ning.com/profile/RachelGard
I knew we couldn't be the only original-only state! Are there any others?
I knew we couldn't be the only original-only state! Are there any others? Rachel,
Massachusetts is not…tag:csrnation.ning.com,2009-12-09:1736041:Comment:11149222009-12-09T23:07:26.730ZTricia McLaughlinhttp://csrnation.ning.com/profile/Tricia58
Rachel,<br />
<br />
Massachusetts is not an O&1 state. As Mary Ann stated, years ago we were as the Orig. usually got sent to the court. The courts no longer will accept anything except in electronic format.<br />
<br />
HTH,<br />
Tricia
Rachel,<br />
<br />
Massachusetts is not an O&1 state. As Mary Ann stated, years ago we were as the Orig. usually got sent to the court. The courts no longer will accept anything except in electronic format.<br />
<br />
HTH,<br />
Tricia Just wanted to update and tha…tag:csrnation.ning.com,2009-12-08:1736041:Comment:11145802009-12-08T05:13:56.177ZRachel Gardhttp://csrnation.ning.com/profile/RachelGard
Just wanted to update and thank everyone for helping on this. The agency IS paying us for the O/1 to the taking attorney and a copy to the other side, which was ordered. So something must have sunk in. Don't know what, though. I appreciate everyone's input on this! I think I have a better handle on California procedures now, which is especially important since this agency is located in California.<br />
<br />
Thanks again,<br />
Rachel
Just wanted to update and thank everyone for helping on this. The agency IS paying us for the O/1 to the taking attorney and a copy to the other side, which was ordered. So something must have sunk in. Don't know what, though. I appreciate everyone's input on this! I think I have a better handle on California procedures now, which is especially important since this agency is located in California.<br />
<br />
Thanks again,<br />
Rachel You're talking about the LA s…tag:csrnation.ning.com,2009-12-08:1736041:Comment:11145442009-12-08T01:56:58.911ZJudy DeAlbahttp://csrnation.ning.com/profile/JudyDeAlba
You're talking about the LA stipulation -- which us Northern California reporters hate!!! The ordering atty gets the O+1 and what happens is the Original is sent to the witness (which means you're cut out of a copy -- they don't need to order it because they're getting it for free.) If I work for a LA firm and they stipulate away the Original, I always let the firm know that I'll be charging them for the O+2 -- which the firm doesn't like and so they keep looking for somebody who will work for…
You're talking about the LA stipulation -- which us Northern California reporters hate!!! The ordering atty gets the O+1 and what happens is the Original is sent to the witness (which means you're cut out of a copy -- they don't need to order it because they're getting it for free.) If I work for a LA firm and they stipulate away the Original, I always let the firm know that I'll be charging them for the O+2 -- which the firm doesn't like and so they keep looking for somebody who will work for less. Hi Rachel,
I had to respond…tag:csrnation.ning.com,2009-12-07:1736041:Comment:11145172009-12-07T23:31:45.053ZTami McVey Wilsonhttp://csrnation.ning.com/profile/TamiMcVey
Hi Rachel,<br />
<br />
I had to respond to this, because as a working official reporter in California, I've reported several civil trials and especially in the larger ones, they are required to lodge the original deposition transcript with the court (NOT a copy). Not that all of them are used, but the ones who they want to impeach at trial are often admitted as exhibits, and they are always the original transcript, so the noticing atty, in California anyway, must have the original to get it in to…
Hi Rachel,<br />
<br />
I had to respond to this, because as a working official reporter in California, I've reported several civil trials and especially in the larger ones, they are required to lodge the original deposition transcript with the court (NOT a copy). Not that all of them are used, but the ones who they want to impeach at trial are often admitted as exhibits, and they are always the original transcript, so the noticing atty, in California anyway, must have the original to get it in to evidence. Then the attys can work off of their copies.<br />
<br />
And by the way, I was a depo reporter in CA for over 13 years and never have I heard of a firm only paying for the original. I'm on the same page as some of the other responses...regardless what you call it, an original or an O/1, they still pay the same. And in court, whenever we get a request for a civil transcript, we quote the party the O/1 rate. We then automatically lodge the original with the court for their file and send only the cert. copy to the requesting party.<br />
<br />
Good luck!<br />
<br />
Tami I've figured out a better way…tag:csrnation.ning.com,2009-12-06:1736041:Comment:11142622009-12-06T11:06:22.573ZRachel Gardhttp://csrnation.ning.com/profile/RachelGard
I've figured out a better way to phrase this. The agency wants to pay us two different rates for an O/1: a higher O/1 rate if the attorneys do the California stipulation and a lower O/1 rate if there's no stipulation -- still both O/1s, though, just a different price based on the stipulation. I highly doubt that the agency is billing the attorneys differently for the O/1 based on the stipulation. If that indeed happens in California that there's two different O/1 rates based on the stipulation,…
I've figured out a better way to phrase this. The agency wants to pay us two different rates for an O/1: a higher O/1 rate if the attorneys do the California stipulation and a lower O/1 rate if there's no stipulation -- still both O/1s, though, just a different price based on the stipulation. I highly doubt that the agency is billing the attorneys differently for the O/1 based on the stipulation. If that indeed happens in California that there's two different O/1 rates based on the stipulation, let me know. That's what I was trying to c…tag:csrnation.ning.com,2009-12-05:1736041:Comment:11141962009-12-05T23:38:40.871ZRachel Gardhttp://csrnation.ning.com/profile/RachelGard
That's what I was trying to convey, Veronica. I think and suspect they're billing the clients based on their California billing practice (O/1) but only paying us for an original, as is custom in Chicago, and paying us for a Chicago-rate original, which is much lower than the California O/1 that they're supposed to be paying us for non-Illinois attorneys and cases. And their biller is trying to claim that since the dep took place in Chicago, it's Chicago billing, which is just totally 100%…
That's what I was trying to convey, Veronica. I think and suspect they're billing the clients based on their California billing practice (O/1) but only paying us for an original, as is custom in Chicago, and paying us for a Chicago-rate original, which is much lower than the California O/1 that they're supposed to be paying us for non-Illinois attorneys and cases. And their biller is trying to claim that since the dep took place in Chicago, it's Chicago billing, which is just totally 100% false. Agencies don't bill according to what state the dep is TAKEN in. Hope that clears it up even more. Yes, the agency is in California, so it should be an O/1. I'm not clear what the issue…tag:csrnation.ning.com,2009-12-05:1736041:Comment:11141952009-12-05T23:32:03.802ZVeronica Kubathttp://csrnation.ning.com/profile/VeronicaKubat
I'm not clear what the issue is, but if the agency that is charging is in CA, it's an O&1. If the agency that is charging is in Chicago, it would be whatever the agency does in Chicago. I'm sure I'm missing something, but it would seem to me that it doesn't matter where the depo is taken. It matters what the billing agency's practice is within that state. (?)<br />
<br />
V.
I'm not clear what the issue is, but if the agency that is charging is in CA, it's an O&1. If the agency that is charging is in Chicago, it would be whatever the agency does in Chicago. I'm sure I'm missing something, but it would seem to me that it doesn't matter where the depo is taken. It matters what the billing agency's practice is within that state. (?)<br />
<br />
V. Hi Mary Ann,
Thanks for the…tag:csrnation.ning.com,2009-12-05:1736041:Comment:11141202009-12-05T17:40:19.403ZRachel Gardhttp://csrnation.ning.com/profile/RachelGard
Hi Mary Ann,<br />
<br />
Thanks for the insight. Sometimes I fear I'm not clear (and therefore become long-winded) because we have a unique situation in Chicago. Here's what I mean by O/1 state. I mean a state in which the taking attorney either receives a phyisical O/1 or, at the very least, pays for the equivalent of O/1, whether they physically receive it or not. I've been a reporter in Chicago for 22 years. Even well before that they changed the rules in Illinois. Transcripts aren't filed with the…
Hi Mary Ann,<br />
<br />
Thanks for the insight. Sometimes I fear I'm not clear (and therefore become long-winded) because we have a unique situation in Chicago. Here's what I mean by O/1 state. I mean a state in which the taking attorney either receives a phyisical O/1 or, at the very least, pays for the equivalent of O/1, whether they physically receive it or not. I've been a reporter in Chicago for 22 years. Even well before that they changed the rules in Illinois. Transcripts aren't filed with the Federal or Circuit Court as a matter of course unless the attorney cites them in a motion, etc. Therefore, in Chicago, the taking attorney physically receives one transcript, the original. All other attorneys in the case have to order their own copy.<br />
<br />
In Chicago, what we get paid for that original is far less than other larger states/cities. I and a lot of my friends do a fair amount of work for out-of-state agencies. ALL of those agencies pay us for an O/1 to the taking attorney. In all instances of cases I've had (because I do a lot of larger cases), the copy attorney/attorneys have also ordered a copy. So what would be an O/1 in Chicago turns into an O/2 for the out-of-state agencies, and we make more money.<br />
<br />
I fear this particular agency I'm talking about is trying to make a couple extra bucks on the reporters' backs because they think they can get away with it because we're "used" to only getting an original in Chicago. However, no other agency pays us this way. In fact, many of the true Chicago agencies pay us an O/1 for out-of-state work. On Illinois-filed cases, federal or state, we just get an original, which is why a few of us have really been marketing ourselves to out-of-state agencies that have good work.<br />
<br />
Hope that clears up what I'm talking about. I appreciate all the responses and help.<br />
<br />
Rachel Hi, Rachel. I'm writing from…tag:csrnation.ning.com,2009-12-05:1736041:Comment:11141112009-12-05T16:46:07.192ZMary Ann Payonkhttp://csrnation.ning.com/profile/MaryAnnPayonkCSRRDRCCPCBC
Hi, Rachel. I'm writing from Washington, D.C., but that doesn't really matter. I think people are getting caught up in the wording. Imagine that! I've been reporting for over 30 years, and back years ago, the conducting atty ALWAYS got what we called the O&1 ... meaning one copy to keep for his own use, because the original was filed with a court somewhere.<br />
<br />
Fast forward to today, and many courts no longer accept the original transcripts for filing purposes. Eventually, attys caught on to…
Hi, Rachel. I'm writing from Washington, D.C., but that doesn't really matter. I think people are getting caught up in the wording. Imagine that! I've been reporting for over 30 years, and back years ago, the conducting atty ALWAYS got what we called the O&1 ... meaning one copy to keep for his own use, because the original was filed with a court somewhere.<br />
<br />
Fast forward to today, and many courts no longer accept the original transcripts for filing purposes. Eventually, attys caught on to that fact, and some probably thought they'd get a price break by saying, 'Well, we don't need an original anymore, just a copy." Little did they know (and some of them DO know very little ...), the cost of that original isn't based on how many copies we print of it. So whether it's called the O&1, or "just" an original, the conducting atty is always charged more for his transcript, along with an appearance fee in most parts of the country.<br />
<br />
When you refer to an O&1 state, I'm not really sure what you mean. Is it the practice that's common in the NY/NJ area where the conducting atty is expected to supply the other side their copy too?<br />
<br />
Whether you call it "the original" or "the original and one," it's the same thing to me, and that charge is the same. Funding the opponent's case is another, and that shouldn't be done at the expense of the court reporter, just in my opinion.<br />
<br />
M.A.