Hello, everyone.
First I apologize if this is not the right place to post this comment and question, but I didn't know where to go.
I need some advice.

I did a realtime, daily copy job on December 15 for a firm in Washington DC. Also the copy side would like a rough ASCII at the end of the day and, if possible, if I had an extra laptop, they wanted realtime. Their instructions are to always get the orders on the record, which I did. I received a call today from the firm saying the copy side did not order. I told them YES, THEY DID, and it was on the record. Plus they received a rough ASCII.
They are telling me now that because it's a New York case, the 0&1 (taking attorney) always buys the other side a copy, but it has to be areed to. I have never heard of that!!!! I've done cases that originate out of New York and I have never had a problem with the copy side.
I also told the firm that I have never heard of supplying an attorney with realtime and/or a rough without them ordering the final. After 20-plus years of reporting and in my neck of the woods, if you want the roughs and/or realtime, you MUST order the final.
So what do I do?
Does anybody supply roughs and realtime when they don't order the final (althouh in my case they did order the final.)
Is it also true in New York they don't get copy orders?
If anybody can help and shed some light on this, I'd really appreciate it.


Views: 338

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Most of my work is on NY cases. No, there is no rule that the taking attorney is required to pay for the copy to the other side.

No, I would not provide a rough or realtime without the final being ordered. You have the order on the record. You provided the service. You should most definitely be paid for what you provided.

What they're telling you sounds like BS to me.
I agree with Janet on this one. There are some states where the hiring does have to provide the copies, but NY is not one of them.

If an attorney gets realtime or a rough at the end of the job, they must pay for that as well as the final copy. That is the policy of my firm. Stand your ground.
No! Absolutely not! I suggest that you send them a letter stating that you cannot agree to provide a rough copy without a transcript order. Attach a copy of the transcript page or pages which have their orders on them.

If you got this job through an agency, they should be backing you up 100 percent on this.
Thank you everybody who has replied. I hate situations like this!!!!
Cathryn, my problem now is i did the job on December 15 and it was daily copy, so they received the job the next day on the 16th. The orders are on the record at the very end of the day, which is what the firm asked me to do. They said they wanted a copy. If I would have known they would come back and say they didn't order a copy, I would not have supplied the realtime and the rough.
I truly believe the firm is not wanting to pay me, the reporter, or they really cut a deal with opposing counsel.
Either way, I'm getting !!!xxx (expletives) in the end.

I would have had them sign an order form in addition to having it on the record. The order form has this line:

______ rough draft (only with purchase of certified transcript)

I only do RT for myself (unfortunately; I'm a bad writer) but if I did, my order form would have both lines:

______ rough draft (only with purchase of certified transcript)
______ RT hookup (only with purchase of certified transcript)

Was this case venued in Supreme Court of the State of New York? If so, there is some BS of taking attorney supplying the other side with a transcript. The agency does not send out this transcript. It is the responsibility of the taking attorney.

Now, is the taking attorney paying for a certified copy over and above the O&1 cost? I do not know. I do know that attorneys frequently will not sign an order form, saying, "Oh, he'll get it to me." And I also know that oftentimes, the CR does not get paid for a copy sale to that party.

This is disgusting and possibly not kosher. I do not know the truth after all these years.

But I do have on my rate sheet a line item that indicates that if the "free copy" side orders a rough, that the agency must charge more than normal and I charge the agency a higher percentage of that higher number. This is to make up for the lack of a copy sale when providing extra services.

As usual, you covered it all. I agree with you 100 percent!
Yep. That's a problem. Unfortunately, they sound dishonest to me. I wish I had a great solution for this. Yes, you could have had copy order forms, but hindsight is 20/20. Also, I once had an order form I used with a firm that I was kind of trying on for size, and the attorneys filled it out and signed it. A couple of days later, one called and canceled the order. The firm just let the attorney roll over them despite having the signed order form in hand, and the job became an O&1. So getting it on the record is good, getting signed order forms is good, but neither are a panacea.

Please be sure to let us know what happens.
The caption on the job was the Supreme Court of the State of New York.
I've just never heard of New York havin a "rule" that the taking attorney pays for the copy side. Out of all the New York cases I've reported in the past, I've never heard that. I've always had them order separately and pay separately. Also if that was the case, I would think the agency should have told me that beforehand.
Also in Colorado we don't use order forms, but perhaps I should start. Although, Cathryn, you made a good point.
And Marge, I'm sure you are an excellent reporter!!!!! (Actually I know you are)
I also think the agency should have told me that they only wanted a rough, not the final, even thouh as I said before, on the record they wanted the final!!! I know, I keep repeating myself.
I think the New York rule they are telling me is BS, plus only paying me for the rough is BS.
I smell something fishy. . . . .
So now the agency has told me they won't pay for the transcript or the daily copy or the realtime hookup (he used my own computer, btw) and they will only pay for the rough. er. . . .
I'll let you know what happens

Thank you for the compliment. Yes, I'm a great reporter and turn out "deadly accurate" work in the words of a nice compliment I got from a lawyer once but I can't write clean with motor-mouths and interrupters and so I don't offer interactive RT. I obviously lose a great deal of high-level work because of this but it's ridiculous to offer the service and risk getting complaints.

Each oddball scenario I encounter, I cover it on my rate sheet. This way I don't have to worry about it again in the future. So you should put an item in there for how to handle extra services with a party who gets a "free copy." Supreme Ct of NY and Superior Ct of NJ are the ONLY venues I know of that have this BS of a "free copy." NO WAY do you offer rough or RT without a copy order. Oh, this BS exists in CA, too, but I've found that the attys do the right thing and order a copy from the CR.

You need to get paid MORE for the rough that went to the party who was receiving a free certified transcript (copy) from the taking atty.

It's totally possible that your CO agency didn't even know about this Supreme Court of NY BS. But now that you know of this phenomenon, plan for it in the future by getting agreement in advance about how that scenario will be handled.

When you say "out of all the NY cases I've taken," do you mean they're all Supreme Court of the ST of NY cases? If it's federal district court, this does not apply. If they're all Supreme Court of the St of NY cases, it's impossible that you haven't encountered this before.

If this "free copy" atty ordered his transcript the next day but the taking atty does NOT order it for the next day, free copy atty pays the daily copy surcharge based on the O&1.
If this free copy atty used a RT hookup, they pay but pay a HIGHER RATE THAN NORMAL to compensate for the lack of a copy order. The agency should be charging the atty and paying you your percentage of that billing. Bad enough to not get a copy sale but YOU CERTAINLY SHOULD BE PAID for the RT hookup. What is up with that? Something is fishy with your CO agency.

Keep us posted on this!
Since I began my scoping business in NYC, I looked in my form book that I have accumulated over the years since I began. Both the state and federal form stipulations that usually appear in the beginning pages of the transcript provide for a free copy to be given to counsel for the testifying witness, not the other side necessarily. So there is a free copy in there, and I guess that's the +1 basic order.
That's interesting. Thanks, Mary.
I'm still very confused though since I've never had this happen before.
Also the deponent did not have his own counsel. He was a third party and was testifying about certain discussions between plf. and def. He was totally independent from the proceedings.

Does this mean then that in New York if the deponent has counsel, they always get a free copy? So a lot of jobs may only be an 0&1 then, right?

Also do the reporters give roughs out and/or realtime without a final order?
I'm so confused. Thanks for the input


© 2024   Created by Kelli Combs (admin).   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service