Sacramento Court Reporters Can Partner with Today’s Legal Professionals

Sacramento Court Reporters Can Partner with Today’s Legal Professionals

Today’s legal professionals have a partner in Sacramento court reporters.

With the challenges of today’s cases, many lawyers are looking for new tools to help them work with more efficiency and effectiveness. Sacramento court reporters can bring their experience and technology to the lawyer’s work, closing the gap between law firms and today’s cases.

Through the National Network of Reporting Companies (NNRC), lawyers anywhere in the country who are working in the Sacramento area can take advantage of the skills of these California court reporters. These professionals can provide the types of services that can make travel more productive, including conference facilities, court reporting, and legal video work.

In some instances, casework in Sacramento can be conducted remotely, and these court reporting firms are ready to take on the challenges of your case in California. They can help facilitate remote depositions, realtime reporting, and other tools that allow you to take full advantage of today’s connectivity.

When you choose a court reporting company, choose one that can be a partner in your legal work. Providing new ideas and innovative technical tools are the specialty of these court reporting companies, and their experience can be a powerful asset for you and your legal team in any type of case.

San Diego Court Reporters Bringing Innovation to Law Firms

San Diego Court Reporters Bring Innovation to Law Firms

In San Diego, lawyers are benefiting from the work of talented court reporters.

In California, lawyers know about the types of valuable services provided by San Diego court reporters. In addition to the accurate transcripts and other documents, these firms now provide several important technical services that are making a difference for attorneys and their clients.

Using the connectivity of the internet, attorneys can now monitor live transcripts and even live legal video. This is allowing them to connect with depositions from their practices, which is saving time that was once taken in travel.

When lawyers do travel, they are often without the team that supports them. This connectivity allows them to consult with their support teams while they are still in the practice, bringing their very best to cases even though they might not be in the room with the attorney.

Traveling lawyers also can take advantage of online document storage, which is bringing a new convenience to the legal profession. Using the internet, attorneys can access transcripts, depositions, and other important documents, eliminating the need to carry paper documents on the road.

Each of these important assets provided by California court reporters can be a part of an effort to provide better services to legal clients. More support can often mean more success for attorneys in the courtroom both for local and visiting attorneys.

Sacramento Court Reporters

Sacramento Court Reporters

Sacramento court reporters can bring new tools to the law firm.

Sacramento court reporters are an important link between law firms and the technology that they can use to enhance their position in their market. Each day, new technology utilizing video, connectivity, and graphics become more of a part of the legal profession, and court reporting companies can help to make that law firms have the latest and best tools at their disposal.

With more law firms working to add diverse types of cases to their work, many are finding a need to expand their reach across the country. This can add additional burdens of travel and expenses to the firm, and video depositions and video conferencing provided by court reporting firms can help. This allows the attorney to work remotely, avoiding the expense of travel.

When attorneys use this technology, they do not have to wait for transcripts to come days after. Realtime reporting can stream data straight from the court reporter’s stenography machine to a laptop anywhere in the country. A rough transcript can be a place to begin the work of harvesting the information from a deposition that can help enhance a case.

When attorneys do have to travel, California court reporters can help to make trips a success. Through NNRC, they can help arrange your work anywhere in the country. They can also help visiting attorneys with their work, providing the highest level of service.

Find out how these experienced firms can help make your work a success and see how technology can play an important role in the way cases are handled.

California Court Reporters


California Court Reporters

Finding the right firm can have a big impact on California cases.

California court reporters can offer law firms a number of tools and services that allow them to work across our vast state.

With so many large cities and smaller communities flung across such a large area, California poses unique challenges to the legal professional. With technologies that include video conferencing and video depositions, attorneys from around the country can connect to their cases in California while never actually leaving their own communities.

For the visiting attorney, California court reporting companies can provide on-site litigation support including videotaping which can be accompanied by realtime reporting, offering the attorney a new way of viewing depositions. California court reporters can also offer comfortable, well equipped conference rooms that are the perfect setting to make working here a productive and efficient time.

Real time reporting has also become an important part of the work of California court reporting firms. Using this new technology, today’s legal professional has another tool to get the most out of each meeting. They now have immediate access to the transcripts they need to better serve their clients.

California attorneys already know about the high-quality service provided by today’s court reporting firms. From pre-trial motions through trial and the appeals process, court reporting firms in California can help to craft solutions for attorneys at every stage of their cases.

In California, legal professionals know that having the right court reporting firm can make a difference in cases. Choosing the best firms can mean the best technology and people are ready to bring the very best in services.

Court Reporter vs. Tape Recorder

Court Reporter vs. Tape Recorder

A court reporter can offer significant advantages to tape recording hearings.

Thirty-three years. That’s how long I have been a California shorthand reporter. During that time, I have reported thousands of depositions, hearings, arbitrations, city council meetings, stockholder meetings, business meetings, and worked in the Los Angeles Superior Court reporting numerous felony trials . You name it, I’ve probably done it.

Ten years ago, I reluctantly agreed to transcribe taped proceedings, but quickly decided I disliked it, primarily because of the poor quality of the tape. When I was recently offered  a job assignment to transcribe a taped hearing for a state agency, I decided to give it a try. After all, in the past 10 years, the quality of tape recordings must have greatly improved.  The added incentive for me was that I didn’t have to drive anywhere, fight traffic, and could be in the comfort of my home. The job was to be a quick turnaround so it needed to be done in a hurry.

After 654 pages of dense taped testimony, it was reinforced why it’s absolutely imperative to have Orange County court reporters at the proceedings to ensure an accurate record. The operative word here is “accurate.”   Timewise, it took me almost twice as long to produce a quasi-accurate record. I had to keep replaying parts I couldn’t hear, could partially hear or understand, and try to identify and distinguish certain voices that sounded similar. Yet, despite this time and effort, the end result had deficiencies and gaps.

It is essential the official guardian of the record be on scene in the room. My biggest realization is that the presence of a trained court reporter who is responsible for the record is what unconsciously dictates the behavior of the participants.

With taped proceedings, the participants easily forget a record is being made. Frequently, the arbitrator, attorneys and witnesses talk on top of each other, making it impossible to detect what was being said and who was speaking. The problem is not cured even after slowing the recording down and listening to it over and over again. In this instance, not only did they forget a record was being made by the tape recorder, the colloquy between the attorneys and arbitrator was often more in a conversational mode rather than the formal dialogue usually engaged in when an official record is being produced. The conversations were prolonged, adding unnecessary pages to an already long hearing.

Second, occasionally one of the parties remembered it was being taped and put her voice right up to the tape recorder, rendering a garbled, unintelligible sound.  It was impossible to understand what she was saying.

Third, an attorney and the arbitrator had similar sounding voices so there were times where I could do no more than make a guess who was speaking.

Fourth, if an attorney or witness was looking at documents, when pages were turned close to the microphone, the sound that was the loudest was the page turning, cancelling out or muffling the person’s voice.

The quality of the tape proved to be ridiculously poor. Apparently it was a hot day and there was a fan in the room creating a lot of ambient noise. This drowned out voices when the person walked away from the microphone. And if the person was soft-spoken, it was unfathomable to discern what was being said despite turning the playback up to full volume.

The final straw that almost broke my back was, for some mysterious reason  throughout three days of listening to these tapes, loud static would randomly interfere with the transmission and obliterate what anybody said. There were full sentences unable to be transcribed because of this phenomenon. The result was numerous inaudible blurbs scattered throughout the transcripts, making a verbatim transcript impossible to produce.  I hope it wasn’t important testimony that was wiped out .

These sentiments were shared among the team of reporters assigned to this project.   This started as a project with “a few tapes” to transcribe. It consisted of various interviews and an arbitration hearing. It was initially assigned to one reporter. After listening to the first few recordings, the reporter recognized that this project was a lot larger than anticipated and could not be transcribed in the time given. A team of nine reporters was assembled to transcribe what turned out to be 3,209 pages of transcript. They spent a total of 316 hours, averaging ten pages an hour. There were some tapes of such poor quality that the reporters were only able to transcribe at a rate of five to six pages an hour. One day, the recording was completely blank.

If these proceedings had been reported by a live reporter, it could have been handled by two reporters. The time it takes to prepare a transcript varies from 20 to 50 pages an hour, depending on the density of material. The preparation time for the 3,209 pages would have been from 64 hours to 160 hours. Transcribing from a tape recording took two to five times longer than using a live reporter.

Of the 3,209 pages, there were 320 inaudible sections. Even with an arbitrator moderating the recorded hearing, there were 175 inaudible sections. These inaudible sections consisted of overlapping speakers, slurred/mumbled speech, witnesses quietly thinking out loud, and  poor recording due to speakers being too far away from the microphones.  Even with the reporters listening to portions over and over again, it was just impossible to decipher what was being said.

Having California court reporting companies present is the most efficient and accurate way to ensure the best possible recording of proceedings for the following reasons:

  • A live reporter can ask for spellings not only of participants’ names but of words unique to the case
  • A live reporter can police the proceedings when the arbitrator fails to by requesting people not talk over each other
  • A live reporter can slow a fast talker down in order to reflect precisely what’s being said
  • A live reporter can actually see who is talking and identify the speaker correctly
  • A live reporter can ask for clarification if a word is mispronounced, slurred, or mumbled
  • A live reporter uses state-of-the-art software that offers multiple backups so there would never be a “blank recording”

Most importantly, a live court reporter, not an inanimate object, can ensure the record is verbatim and accurately reflected which should be the goal for both the reporter and the client.

Evelyn Mah
Abrams, Mah & Kahn
4101 Birch St., Suite 130
Newport Beach, CA 92660
P: 800.622.0226, F: 949.261.6688