Court Reporting Board of Arizona Proposes to Cut Ethics From Code

[Lisa Migliore Black]

http://blog.courtreportersaz.com/2013/09/16/court-reporting-board-o...

[Lisa Migliore Black]

Both Ohio and Kentucky prohibit contracting.  Ohio's law is weaker, in my opinion, but both state laws need improvement.

I firmly support licensure in Kentucky.  It was voted down for a myriad of reasons at the last convention, one of which was finances.   

The divide Natalie speaks of is largely due to the fact that some feel the association has not done enough to fight illegal contracting, but an association can only do so much without a regulatory board in place.  

Many reporters have been hard hit by illegal contracting mandating their client use specific reporting agencies, and they refuse to take work offered from known contractors. There are many complaints by attorneys regarding cost-shifting and quality of service.

[Sharon Smith]

Now  I am confused.  You have no State law requiring certification; you have no 'regulatory board' as a State Board of Court Reporting - am I understanding this correctly?? If so, wow! Is what you call your anti-contracting law really LAW, passed by your Legislature, or just an 'opinion rule' of a C/R Association?  If not passed by Legislature, it isn't law, LB., it's just an opinion of a bunch of reporters who belong to the same association.  If you have no State Board, how in the world would you enforce it - who do you complain to - who makes the decision if it's contracting and what the penalty may be & who imposes it??  There is a big difference between calling something a LAW and just an opinion rule of an organization.  Sounds like you only have an "opinion" of an organization rather than a "Law"

 

[T. S. HUBBARD JR]

The state of Maine has reversed their law, back to allowing third party contracting. Big, big, big loss for the NCRA. Folks, this is the way the wind is blowing. It is not at all bad to be associated with the regional and national firms. They need you as much as you need them. Lisa Black is fighting a losing battle. Admirable on her lonesome part. But naive just the same. I dare her to find 10 like minded NCRA friends of hers who will back her up right here what she is saying. Let's really see how many colleagues subscribe to her views right here and now!

[Lisa O'Sullivan]

Exactly. Maine reversed, and Arizona is proposing to back off, and I believe we will see other states slowly doing the same, since the Magna v. Arizona lawsuit woke people up. Agreed too that Maine was a big loss indeed for TPTB at NCRA, even though they spun it otherwise in the misleading headline previously referred to.

[Lisa Migliore Black]

Sorry you're confused, Sharon.  KRS 454.280, law with criminal penalties. Transcripts are void.  Complaints would be filed with local prosecutors, and the courts would rule on the matter.

[Lisa O'Sullivan]

I dare say Sharon's not the least bit "confused," Dr. Mig.

[Quyen]

"The divide Natalie speaks of is largely due to the fact that some feel the association has not done enough to fight illegal contracting, but an association can only do so much without a regulatory board in place."

Since you seem to have so much time on your hands, perhaps you could cite code for us for each of the states in which you claim contracting is illegal. If contracting were truly illegal, your association would not need to do anything to attempt to enforce the law. I would think the state would have that under wraps. If the association has no power to do anything, then perhaps it's not illegal in the first place? Huh. Just a thought. But, please, cite code and prove me wrong; I'd love that.

[Lisa Migliore Black]

KRS 454.280 states as follows:

(1) Depositions taken in the Commonwealth that are to be used in its courts shall be taken before:
(a) A hearing examiner;
(b) A judge, clerk, commissioner, or official reporter of a court;
(c) A notary public; or
(d) Before other persons and under other circumstances authorized by law.
(2) (a) A deposition shall not be taken by a person who is:
1. A party to the action;
2. A relative, employee, or attorney of one (1) of the parties;
3. Someone with a financial interest in the action or its outcome; or
4. A relative, employee, or attorney of someone with a financial interest in
the action or its outcome. For the purposes of this subparagraph,
"employee" or "relative" shall not include an employee or relative of the
attorney of one (1) of the parties.
(b) For the purposes of paragraph (a) of this subsection, "employee" includes a
person who has a contractual relationship with a person or entity interested in the outcome of the litigation, including anyone who may ultimately be responsible for payment to provide reporting or other court services, and a
person who is employed part-time or full-time under contract or otherwise by
a person who has a contractual relationship with a party to provide reporting
or other court services.
(c) If a deposition is taken by a person described in paragraph (a) of this subsection, then that deposition shall be void.
(3) The provisions of subsections (1) and (2) of this section shall not apply to contracts
for court reporting services for the courts, agencies, or instrumentalities of the
United States or the Commonwealth.
(4) Any person who takes a deposition in violation of subsection (2) of this section
shall be guilty of a Class B misdemeanor.

[Lisa Migliore Black]

http://www.ncra.org/Government/content.cfm?ItemNumber=8668&toke...

[Lisa O'Sullivan]

"Contracting is illegal in my state (and approximately half of the other states), not merely unethical.  You and Lisa seem to forget that when you personalize your arguments to me instead of debating the issues."

I guess that would be a nice argument if either of us had ever commented on Kentucky, where you live, or Ohio now too, I guess, where your husband lives; also if either of us had ever actually not debated the issues! Jesus.

[T. S. HUBBARD JR]

So maybe this is true that 50% of the states prohibit third-party contracting. Maybe there are laws or administrative laws that say third-party contracting is illegal. Well, guess what, so is speeding, so is going through a red light. But does that stop us from breaking the law? No, not at all.

Ask yourself this common sense question if you are a lawyer, "Am I going to check every time I book a deposition if this is third-party contracting especially if I am standing in for somebody else who originally booked the deposition?"

No, they don't have the time to police this stuff. As more and more little court reporting offices are disappearing and merging with ever bigger regional and national firms, lawyers are finding out that there really are no more independent court reporters anymore and besides the big firms really do offer a lot more services than do the small firms.

When is the last time you heard or read about a lawyer or a law firm in your home town get reprimanded, scolded, fined, disbarred because they signed up for services with a regional or national court reporting firm?

Believe me the language in a so called third party contract can be twisted so it does not look like a third-party contract.

Dare I even postulate that there are even verbal contracts, a gentlemen's handshake, a wink as the only evidence of a meeting of the minds between law firms and regional and national court reporting firms and business carries on as usual.

Dare I go further and say, if you are a small reporting firm, and you have been slowly losing your customer base to a competitor of yours, it may well be that your competitor has been for some time now a member of a regional or national firm but they don't broadcast the fact.

So are you going to sue that reporting agency and sink big money into prosecuting your rights to reclaim your lost customer base? There are no guarantees here that you will win your cause of action, but you may well lose everything because you owe big fees and made enemies of former law firms.

Lisa Black can spout off all she wants.

It's not going to change a thing.

What big changes you will see however is watching the NCRA sink into oblivion because long ago its usefulness to serve was suspect. More people are leaving the NCRA than are joining it. This is a recipe for oblivion, obscurity.

There is little use in fighting a battle that can never be won that is long lasting and truly enforceable. They are only words on paper with no real teeth to them. That is not the real world we live in.

[Sharon Smith]

Everybody is just spinning their wheels until the US DOJ renders an opinion - that will rule. Doesn't matter what NCRA thinks, what States think should be the Law. I agree with T.S. , NCRA on its way out.  We're tired of it trying to play God over us & continually over-reaching its bounds when decisions of NCRA are made by nothing more than reporters, some of whom were playing in the sandbox when I stated my C/R business 36 years ago! :) So I really don't think they are qualified to tell me how to run my OWN business.   If you want to continue to work your butt off and contribute your hard-earned money to them to pay high salaries, free trips, free dinners, etc., you go right ahead - not me! C/R industry IS a business & should be treated like a business.  A person conducting a business is either ethical, or not & passing "opinions" is not going to force someone to be ethical. You cannot legislate morality!  Look what happened last night - GOV shut down over a Law that had already been passed by both Houses!  So do you really think one little 'opinion' by NCRA and one little State Law on contracting is gonna hold up?  Get real!

Every State that has had their anti-contracting Statute challenged has LOST. Delware lost its suit against Gallo couple years back by the decision of their OWN Supreme Court; Arizona back-pedaling now; Maine back-pedaling now; Ga. sitting on tons of complaints and doing absolutey NOTHING about it.  All the while it's putting C/R after C/R out of business because this issue is tieing the hands of the C/R's trying to abide by it & forcing them out of biz one by one. BTW, the listing of States with active anti-contracting statutes NCRA has on its website in inaccurate - they need to update it. They direly need to change the headline about Maine - that is totally, totally misleading - and, frankly, I think done purposely because they do not want to admit defeat - because, if they admit defeat, they can't be God anymore. :) 

I truly feel for the C/R's in Kentucky & Ohio who are turning down jobs from these folks (jobs that I'm sure they direly need to survive but can't take because of their so-called law) - they'll probably be out of business before DOJ rules.  Plus, it's not just national firms that are contracting - it's going on INTRA State with large C/R firms, it's just kept quiet.  Wake up!

L.B. - you don't have to cut & paste language from other websites to try to explain things to me - believe me I've seen all of it for years & always before I ever post anything. But be careful in  your posts & make sure you include info of primary source you obtain it from - some of your posts 'appear' that it is YOUR personal language when all you have done is copy it from another website, NCRA, etc.  - be careful not to plagiarize.  From looks of your photo, you may be one that was in the sandbox when I started reporting. :)