Question for California reporters

[Rachel Gard]

Hi Everyone!

Can the California reporters help with this? I'm in Chicago. A few of my independent friends and I have recently started working for a California agency, Los Angeles. All of us do work for a number of out-of-state agencies and do quite a bit of out-of-state work. In Illinois, we have an original to the taking attorney, not an O/1. All of the other out-of-state agencies we work for pay an O/1 to us for the taking attorney.

This California agency is trying to tell us for their California clients who come to Chicago (and even in California), if there isn't specially the "stipulation" -- which I know what that is -- the taking attorney gets an original only, not an O/1. I've never heard of this. I thought all California (and almost every other state for that matter) attorneys receive an O/1 regardless of what they do with the original for signature. I've ALWAYS been paid for the O/1 if it's a state other than Illinois.

Are they trying to pull the wool over our eyes here? Do California attorneys ever receive an Original only?

Rachel

[Kelli Combs (admin)]

It is always an O & 1 as far as I know. I have never been told it is just an original. Maybe the agency made some deal with the attorney or something.

I have been reporting in California for 20 years and this is the first time I have heard it is only an original. Maybe I am missing something. It will be interesting to see what other California reporters have to say about this.

[Kelli Combs (admin)]

I was thinking, it does not matter what the California agency wants to call it, whether it is an O & 1 or not, just make sure you are getting at least 3.30 to 3.60 (or more if you can get it) a page for that "original."

If they are not willing to do that, then they are up to something in my opinion.

[Quyen]

I have been reporting in CA for 8+ years, and I have never heard of any CA taking/noticing attorney getting an original ONLY. It's an automatic O and 1. The southern California attorneys, often (always, from my experience, having worked with them) stipulate away their copy, so perhaps that is what they mean. I don't know if, in the case where the copy is stipulated away, the original is sent unsealed to the noticing attorney. Southern California attorneys have pretty much made up their own rules regarding the handling of the original and they don't do it by code (which I think should be illegal because the original could potentially tampered with), and they have done a wonderful job of confusing everyone involved in the process. I would try to clear it up with the firm.

[Cathryn Bauer]

I have never heard of California attorneys receiving only an original.

My instinct is to caution you to be very careful of this agency. I would appreciate you sending me a private message saying which one it is.

[Veronica Kubat]

Sounds weird. Been doing this 26 years in So. Cal. Always an O&1 and always the client gets the cc at least. The org is oftentimes stipulated away (So. Cal., not Northern Ca.). So where is the copy going? To opposing counsel for a fee? As suggested, just be sure you are getting the sufficient page rate for an O&1.

Veronica

[Rachel Gard]

Well, we have a Chicago rate sheet for this agency and they want to pay us a Chicago original, which is considerably lower than a California O/1. On jobs where it's California attorneys coming to Chicago and they do the stipulation to send the original to the other side, they pay us an O/1 in the range that Kelli suggested. The issue has come up when it's a California (or even another O/1 state) where they didn't specifically state the stipulation. They want to pay us for a Chicago original only even though it's a California case with California attorneys. So far on cases where they've done the stipulation, I've gotten a certified copy from the other side, so effectively the O/2. I almost don't give them a choice. I say, "Would you like a regular or mini as your certified copy." So far it's worked.

A colleague spoke with the biller earlier who said yeah, she knows that all other states except Illinois are O/1 states but the dep took place in Illinois. We might be dealing with some "confusion," if you will, with this biller. It wouldn't be the first time and probably won't be the last.

I'm going to be seeing the owner and the Chicago office executive in a couple weeks at their Christmas party. I'll probably bring up these issues with them then.

Thanks for all the help.

Rachel

[Glen Warner]

I seem to remember seeing something about "stipulations" over on Depoman a few days back ... but I think it was just for northern CA. The person that mentioned it on Depoman wasn't very pleased that the stipulation existed, either.

[Jennie Ann]

The attorney receives an original AND gets a free copy? Is that what O/1 means?

WOW, WOW, WOW!

Maybe I have been out of the legal arena too long, but I ain't ever heard of that.

The attorneys in my area get a free E-Transcript with a word index, but to receive two copies of the deposition, that practice seems unusual to me. I'm not saying it is not done; I am saying I am not familiar with it. I'm in D.C.

I am going to ask a couple court reporting company owner friends in my area if this is their practice too. That's one of the reasons I like this forum. It is interesting to see how things are doing in our industry elsewhere, giving me food for thought.

Admittedly, I am out of the loop in the legal arena.

[Rachel Gard]

I'm going to add a few more facts to see if the procedure changes. Just asking because I don't know. California agency does scheduling, billing, production, and distribution from California. Attorneys are from Florida in a case not in California but in Florida, which I understand is also an O/1 state. Parenthetically, is there any other state other than Illinois that's NOT an O/1 state?

Anyway, dep takes place in Chicago. Everything else is done from California. Still an O/1 to the taking attorney, right? Just need to clarify.

Thanks for all your help, everyone.

Rachel

[Mary Ann Payonk]

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.

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.

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?

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.

M.A.

[Rachel Gard]

Hi Mary Ann,

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.

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.

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.

Hope that clears up what I'm talking about. I appreciate all the responses and help.

Rachel

[Tricia McLaughlin]

Rachel,

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.

HTH,
Tricia