ILNews

Court reporters make push for licensing

Dave Stafford
September 19, 2013
Keywords
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Court reporters will make a case to a legislative commission this week that the state should set minimum standards and licensing criteria for professionals who record and compile the transcripts of judicial proceedings.

The Commission on the Courts’ agenda for its meeting Tuesday includes discussion about licensing court reporters. There currently are no minimum standards for the profession in Indiana, according to Vickie Dudeck, president of the Indiana Shorthand Reporters Association.  

“We feel that litigants, attorneys, and the general public should be assured that they are getting capable and quality service every time they are involved in a situation where the record needs to be captured or memorialized in a state court matter (in courts or in discovery), similar to the standards and rules established for all federal court cases,” Dudeck said. “The fact that it is a lower court matter shouldn't automatically mean that it's a crap shoot when it comes to the quality of the record.”

Dudeck said the group will present to the commission Tuesday to discuss how a licensing or certification system in Indiana would benefit courts. She said more than 20 states have minimum standards for court reporters, and the lack of such standards would improve the quality of transcripts and foster ethics in the profession.

“What we are proposing is not that we dictate the method of capturing the record (steno, digital recording, or voice writing), but instead we establish some standards in Indiana,” she said.

Also before the commission Tuesday will be discussion of whether there is a need for more than one court-appointed psychiatrist when a defendant raises the issue of insanity.

The commission meets at 10 a.m. Tuesday in Room 431 of the Statehouse, 200 W. Washington St., Indianapolis. The meeting is open to the public, or may be viewed via online webcast at http://www.in.gov/legislative/2441.htm.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Court Reporter Certification
    It is admirable to seek state certification. But it won't happen. The cost of running a state board is expensive. If Indiana does implement state licensure no less than 50% oof all steno reporters will leave Indiana as they will not be successful candidates to pass both speed and general knowledge requirements. If they are granfathered in, then what is achieved? The same people are still responsible. Nothing is really gained in the short run. Besides, let's face facts. Certainly steno court reporting is a dying art. Within 7 years 50% of all stenos will be retiring and there will be no steno to replace them. So what's to be achieved in the long run. The best insurance policy for Indiana to secure 100% accuracy in taking down, recording, playback, transcribing, not just for Indiana, but for every state is to introduce DAR in every courtroom and make it the official record AND still use court reporters / transcribers who can produce a transcript that is timely, verifiable and always accessible. A steno certification in today's Digital Age is meaningless.

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. CCHP's real accomplishment is the 2015 law signed by Gov Pence that basically outlaws any annexation that is forced where a 65% majority of landowners in the affected area disagree. Regardless of whether HP wins or loses, the citizens of Indiana will not have another fiasco like this. The law Gov Pence signed is a direct result of this malgovernance.

  2. I gave tempparry guardship to a friend of my granddaughter in 2012. I went to prison. I had custody. My daughter went to prison to. We are out. My daughter gave me custody but can get her back. She was not order to give me custody . but now we want granddaughter back from friend. She's 14 now. What rights do we have

  3. This sure is not what most who value good governance consider the Rule of Law to entail: "In a letter dated March 2, which Brizzi forwarded to IBJ, the commission dismissed the grievance “on grounds that there is not reasonable cause to believe that you are guilty of misconduct.”" Yet two month later reasonable cause does exist? (Or is the commission forging ahead, the need for reasonable belief be damned? -- A seeming violation of the Rules of Profession Ethics on the part of the commission) Could the rule of law theory cause one to believe that an explanation is in order? Could it be that Hoosier attorneys live under Imperial Law (which is also a t-word that rhymes with infamy) in which the Platonic guardians can do no wrong and never owe the plebeian class any explanation for their powerful actions. (Might makes it right?) Could this be a case of politics directing the commission, as celebrated IU Mauer Professor (the late) Patrick Baude warned was happening 20 years ago in his controversial (whisteblowing) ethics lecture on a quite similar topic: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1498&context=ilj

  4. I have a case presently pending cert review before the SCOTUS that reveals just how Indiana regulates the bar. I have been denied licensure for life for holding the wrong views and questioning the grand inquisitors as to their duties as to state and federal constitutional due process. True story: https://www.scribd.com/doc/299040839/2016Petitionforcert-to-SCOTUS Shorter, Amici brief serving to frame issue as misuse of govt licensure: https://www.scribd.com/doc/312841269/Thomas-More-Society-Amicus-Brown-v-Ind-Bd-of-Law-Examiners

  5. Here's an idea...how about we MORE heavily regulate the law schools to reduce the surplus of graduates, driving starting salaries up for those new grads, so that we can all pay our insane amount of student loans off in a reasonable amount of time and then be able to afford to do pro bono & low-fee work? I've got friends in other industries, radiology for example, and their schools accept a very limited number of students so there will never be a glut of new grads and everyone's pay stays high. For example, my radiologist friend's school accepted just six new students per year.

ADVERTISEMENT