Guarding the Deposition Record When a Stenographer is Nowhere in Sight
Don't be surprised if there is no stenographer in your next deposition. A little history may help put your mind at ease.
August 06, 2019 at 07:00 AM
6 minute read
It has been widely reported that the number of active stenographic court reporters is declining rapidly. Court reporting schools are closing, graduation numbers are dropping and interest in the career is very low. This is all true.
Court reporting firms across the country have begun to schedule digital reporters, the most common alternative when a certified stenographer is not available. Digital reporters use digital audio recording devices to record court proceedings and depositions. Professional digital reporters take electronic notes that are synchronized to the recording, which allows for easy read-backs during the deposition. The synchronized notes also aid in the production of an accurate and timely transcript.
Court reporters have long been the official “keeper of the record.” They are trusted and professional. These individuals are often certified, and all have a formal court reporting education. The idea that this trained professional will not be in the deposition to manage the record is a bit disconcerting to many in the legal profession. It’s understandable. One might wonder if this newfangled method can be trusted?
A little history may help put your mind at ease.
The Federal Judicial Center, the research and education agency of the judicial branch of the U.S. government, conducted an in-depth study on the use of audio recording (tapes) to capture the official record of court proceedings in U.S. district courts. The report, A Comparative Evaluation of Stenographic and Audiotape Methods for United Stated District Court Reporting, was published in July 1983; yes, nearly 40 years ago. The study concluded that:
Given appropriate management and supervision, electronic sound recording can provide an accurate record of United States district court proceedings at reduced costs, without delay or interruption and provide the basis for accurate and timely transcript delivery.
Since 1983, of course, recording technology has advanced dramatically. A large professional community of digital reporters and transcribers has grown to service the rapidly increasing demand in the market. And, as of 2018, the majority of courtrooms and hearing rooms throughout North America operate digital recording systems daily.
So, as the study reported that it would, given appropriate management and supervision, audio recording of legal proceedings works very well.
Recently, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure were amended to allow for the unrestricted use of electronic recording to capture the official record in a deposition. And, by recently, I mean in 1993!
That’s right: Audio recording has been permitted under the FRCP for more than 25 years. While some states, including California, require notice and stipulation to use non-stenographic methods of recording in depositions, many states have no special requirements, and audio recording has been used successfully for decades.
The American Association of Electronic Reporters and Transcribers (AAERT) was founded in 1994 by a small group of audio reporting and transcription professionals. The founders recognized the need to support electronic court reporting by establishing best practices and certification programs. Today, AAERT offers certification for digital court reporters and transcribers nationwide. A certified electronic reporter, or CER, must demonstrate professional knowledge and skills in the use of modern digital recording technologies, court reporting rules and procedures, legal vocabulary and best practices for annotations and exhibit management. CERs must be a notary public in the state where they practice, ensuring that they can swear in witnesses.
A certified electronic transcriber, or CET, has been tested on proper transcription formatting, general court procedures and practices, legal and medical vocabulary and the operation of modern transcription software.
AAERT certification is recognized and frequently required by state judiciaries and government agencies. Compliance with AAERT standards for ethics, confidentiality and continuing education is required to maintain certification. By selecting AAERT-certified reporters and transcribers, you can be assured that you are working with true professionals.
Certified professionals are expected to abide by AAERT best practices. The AAERT Best Practices Guide provides a comprehensive and review of digital reporting and transcription in the court and deposition environments. The guide establishes the basis for certification preparation and serves as a framework for digital reporters and transcribers and their clients to understand the most efficient and reliable methods for capturing, producing and protecting the record of legal proceedings.
The current market turmoil is certainly not the first time that a traditional service has been disrupted by a new method, and it won’t be the last. The robustness and reliability of digital recording technology are self-evident. You record audio and video every day on your phone, your television and your computer. The legitimate concern with the transition to digital reporting of depositions has related to the person behind the recorder. The good news is that we already have a well-developed professional community with certifications and best practices ready to support you.
Make no mistake: If you have not had a problem scheduling a stenographic court reporter yet, you will. And when that happens, there is a good chance that your court reporting firm will send a digital reporter to cover your deposition. Should you be concerned when that happens? Not if you are scheduling through a reputable firm that hires professional, trained and certified digital reporters and transcribers. You trusted your court reporting firm before and you can trust it now.
But wait: I need a transcript. How do I get that? How long will it take? And how much will it cost?
Rest easy, we will cover that in the next article.
Steve Townsend is CEO of TheRecordXchange, a web‐based platform for court reporting professionals. He has extensive experience in courtroom and hearing room reporting and transcription. He was CEO of FTR from 1997 to 2007 and CEO of AVTranz from 2008 to 2015. Townsend is a co‐founder of the American Association of Electronic Reporters and Transcribers.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250