NCRA member’s CART work featured in local paper

JCR: Journal of Court Reporting, TheJCR.com, JCR WeeklyOn July 11, the Northwest Boomer and Senior News posted an article featuring NCRA member Elizabeth Archer, a CART captioner in Portland, Ore. Archer is the owner of Archer Captioning.

Read more.

2016 Court Reporting & Captioning Week gains traction in media coverage

Court Reporting & Captioning Week has put a number of NCRA members in the media spotlight, sharing information with viewers and readers about the vast number of opportunities available in the field.

Kicking off the week, Christine Phipps, RPR, owner of Phipps Reporting in West Palm Beach, Fla., was featured in a story aired by CBS affiliate channel 12, while NCRA Past President Nancy Varallo, RDR, CRR, owner of The Varallo Group in Worcester, Mass., joined NCRA member Kathy Silva, RPR, CRR, a freelancer from Andover, Mass., in a story that aired on Mass Appeal.

Appearing in print on behalf of NCRA and the court reporting and captioning professions were NCRA members Donna Cascio, RDR, CMRS, an official court reporter from Somerset, Pa., who was interviewed by the Somerset Daily American, and Melanie Oldham, an official court reporter from Athens, Texas, who was interviewed by the Athens Daily Review. Additional coverage is expected to be generated throughout the week.

NCRA President Steve Zinone, RPR, an official court reporter from Pittsfield, N.Y., joined Tonya Kaiser, RPR, CMRS, a freelance reporter from Fort Wayne and president of the Indiana Court Reporters Association; Susan Gee, RMR, CRR, a freelance reporter from Cincinnati and president-elect of the Ohio Court Reporters Association; and Kathy McHugh, RPR, CRR, a freelance reporter from Philadelphia and president of the Pennsylvania Court Reporters Association in a panel discussion at the College of Court Reporting, in Hobart, Ind., on Feb. 15. The discussion, which took place online via the college’s Blackboard Collaborate, was hosted by CCR President Jeff Moody. More than 30 participants joined the discussion to hear what the panelists had to say about the greatest challenges they faced in court reporting school and how they overcame them, as well as how they were motivated to become leaders within their associations, the benefits of membership at the state and local levels, and the importance of certification. The hour-long session was recorded and can be heard here.

On Feb. 17, Zinone will visit Cuyahoga Community College in Cleveland, Ohio, where he will address students and faculty at the court reporting program. He is scheduled to deliver a keynote address at 2:30 p.m. ET which can be accessed via the college’s Smart TV channel online.

Official proclamations recognizing 2016 Court Reporting & Captioning Week from state and local lawmakers continue to be reported. To date, the following states have reported official proclamations: California, Colorado, Florida, Illinois, Kentucky, New Hampshire, New York, Ohio, Oregon, Texas, Virginia, and Washington. Local proclamations have also been issued in Miami-Date County, Fla.; Johnson County, Kan.; Louisville, Ky.; Eugene, Ore.; and San Antonio, Texas.

Below are some of the latest activities happening during the week around the nation:

  • The New York State Court Reporters Association will host a variety of events during the week including meet and greets throughout the state.
  • Members of the Texas Court Reporters Association are will host a number of Veterans History Project events throughout the state.
  • The Hawaii Court Reporters and Captioners Association has encouraged members to display the official 2016 Court Reporting & Captioning Week logo on their social media sites, hang posters at courthouses showcasing the event, and reach out to state and local lawmakers to remind them of the week.
  • Members of the Oregon Court Reporters Association will participate in a number of meetings with lawmakers and advocacy groups to bring awareness to the court reporting and captioning professions.

For a complete list of activities happening to mark the 2016 Court Reporting & Captioning Week, visit NCRA.org/Awareness. For more information, visit NCRA.org. Career information about the court reporting profession — one of the leading career options that do not require a traditional four-year degree — can be found at crTakeNote.com.

 

City of Portland, Ore., passes TV caption ordinance

In 2014, a coalition of concerned citizens called Portland: Turn on the Captions Now brought the issue of local businesses not turning the captions on their televisions to the attention of Portland, Ore., City Commissioner Amada Fritz. A year later, on Dec. 18, 2015, an ordinance took effect that requires captions be turned on all the time on televisions in public places throughout the city. The expectation of the coalition: Businesses in Portland will turn on the captions once, and leave them on.

“The members of this coalition found that most often when they would ask for captions to be turned on at places that had televisions, the employees of the business would say they didn’t know how to turn them on, or they could not find the remote control, or it was too hard to do when they were busy,” said NCRA member Carol Studenmund, RDR, CRC, CRC, a broadcast captioner and member of the Portland: Turn on the Captions Now coalition.

“Comcast is the major cable provider in Portland. And turning the captions on through a Comcast box is not always easy to do, even if you know how to work with TV equipment. Some businesses turn on the captions all the time and enjoy having them on. But those businesses are in the minority,” added Studenmund, who also serves on NCRA’s Broadcast and CART Captioning Committee.

Joining Studenmund on the coalition were also Portland residents Jim House and Steve Brown, both deaf and long-time advocates for the deaf community on city, state, and nationals levels, as well as David Viers, a long-time advocate for people with hearing loss who wears two cochlear implants.

According to Studenmund, prior to the ordinance, many businesses with televisions would have them turned on sometimes with the sound on and only sometimes with captions on, 99 percent of the time for entertainment purposes only. However, when emergency coverage goes on the air, the captions need to be visible so that everyone can understand what is being said. “The bottom line of this effort was to make sure all citizens in Portland have access to important information during times of emergency,” she said.

Studenmund said that captions can also help people learn to read and learn the English language. In Multnomah, Ore., for example, County Sheriff Dan Staton ordered that captions be turned on the televisions located in the county jail over two years ago as a way to teach inmates how to read. In addition, when the National Captioning Institute sold caption decoders before televisions were required to have caption decoders built in, more than 40 percent of the people who purchased a decoder reported that it was to help them learn English as a second – or third or fourth – language.

“During the process of getting this ordinance written and passed, the U.S. Department of Transportation implemented a rule requiring all televisions in U.S. airports have the captions turned on all the time. That U.S. DOT rule helped the City Council come to its decision about this local ordinance. The vote of the Council was 5-0,” said Studenmund.

According to Studenmund, businesses should not have to spend any money to accomplish providing captioning on their television sets. Comcast, she noted, is ready to help its business customers turn on the captions. In addition, Portland has created a website with more information and may fine a business up to $500 per day for not turning on captions.

“But it is not the city’s goal to need to impose that fee on any business,” said Studenmund. “The goal is to turn the captions on and leave them on. Any fine would be imposed only after many unsuccessful attempts are made to get the captions turned on.”

Portland: Turn on the Captions Now also created a website with information about its efforts to help ensure the captioning ordinance was approved. In addition, a number of organizations representing people who are deaf, as well as chapters of the Hearing Loss Association of America, are looking to Portland’s efforts as a model for possible legislation around the country. Among those chapters is the Hearing Loss Association of America – Kansas City Chapter, which recently launched the Kansas: Open Caption Initiatives and Kansas: Turn On the TV Captions Now projects. The projects will help build statewide support for a mandate requiring captions on all TVs located in public places, as well as open captioning in movie theaters and at major public events.

Portland City Council passes closed captioning ordinance

KPTV-KPDX Broadcasting Corp., Portland, Ore., reported on Nov. 18 that an ordinance unanimously passed by the city council requiring closed captioning to be turned on for any public televisions. The new ordinance will take effect in 30 days.

Read more.

Three firms merge in Northwest

LNS Court Reporting has combined with Teach Reporting–Moore & Henderson, a recently merged Portland court reporting firm. The newly joined firm will operate under the name of LNS Court Reporting.

“We are thrilled to join forces with not just one, but two of the most established and respected court reporting firms in our state,” said Robin Nodland, RDR, CRR, president of LNS Court Reporting.

Under the new title of director of client development, Catherine Teach will bring 31 years of experience to the newly combined firm. “I am so excited to have the opportunity to join our companies, our expertise, our drive for accurate reporting, and our dedication to providing outstanding service to our legal community,” said Teach, RPR, CRI, founder of Teach Reporting.

Read more.

Oregon court reporting association pairs with state bar to host Veterans Day event

In recognition of Veterans Day 2014, the Oregon Court Reporters Association and the Oregon State Bar’s Military and Veterans Law Section have partnered to host a Veterans History Day event Sat., Nov. 8 at locations in Portland, Salem, Eugene, Medford, and Bend.

“The members of the Oregon Court Reporters Association are very excited to be a part of this effort, and several members of its Board of Directors have volunteered to organize events in their respective cities,” said OCRA president and court reporter Robin Nodland, RDR, CRR, who is coordinating the project.

Read more.

High-tech innovators consider theater captioning alternatives

The Mail Tribune, Ore., has reported that the Rogue Valley high-tech community will tackle an array of issues associated with on-screen captions when they gather for their annual “hackathon.” The group has partnered with the Southern Oregon University Center for the Arts to test any new captioning technology generated from the meeting throughout the summer. Specifically, the group will examine ways to alleviate issues pertaining to the use of personal hand-held devices to read captions, such as smartphones and iPads.

Read more.

What’s happening in the courthouse?

What's happening in the courthouse

Budget cuts in many states have led to increased concern about the continued place of court reporters in U.S. courts. The reality is far more varied.

It has been a challenging decade for state, local, and county official court reporters, to say the least. Not only have they been routinely targeted by judicial bureaucrats seeking cost savings by implementing recording technology, but they’ve also at times been swept up in the new privatization of government services trend, with courtrooms replacing officials — and their pensions and benefits — with independent reporters working on a per diem basis.

SO HOW IS THE OFFICIAL COURT REPORTING COMMUNITY HOLDING UP?

While that largely depends on not only who you ask, but where you go, for the most part, it can be characterized as not as good as it used to be, but not quite as bad as initially feared. In some states, such as Texas, there are even opportunities for young court reporters to embark on a career as an official provided they’re willing to start by working in a remote part of the state. Other states, such as Oregon, have no official reporters outside of the federal courts — and despite at least one high profile case involving a problematic digital audio recording of the penalty phase of a capital murder trial, there’s very little chance of reporters being put back on the payroll full-time any time soon. [Ed. note: There is a bill pending in Oregon that would require a court reporter on capital cases.]

It’s also interesting to note how the strategies employed by official reporters and the state court reporting associations that often go to bat on their behalf can vary dramatically from state to state. In California, for example, court reporters have largely succeeded in keeping out electronic recording, though independent reporters are now being brought in and paid for by the attorneys in civil cases in counties where some or all officials have been laid off. (See sidebar on page 40 for more about California’s changing landscape.) In contrast, in King County, Wash., the relatively successful focus of the unionized official reporters was on allowing electronic recording for some trials but keeping outside reporter from hearing cases.

And in Florida, the battle to keep out digital has resulted in a compromise of sorts: a mixture of digital audio, officials, and contract independents from local firms who work per diem, all of which is determined by the chief judge in each circuit. “The pendulum has swung and the courts have reached their own water level in terms of reporting methods,” says Sandra Estevez, current president of the Florida Court Reporters Association. “The power of the purse dictates the needs of the courts and hybrid methods utilized.”

In some states, you can find a silver lining if you look hard enough. Even California has Fresno County where there are still plenty of officials on staff, even as other counties have laid off all the official court reporters and privatized trial work.

If there is any lesson to be gained from looking at official court reporters in different states, it’s the notion of geography playing a role in destiny. If you’re fortunate enough to work as an official in a state or county with court administrators who value the integrity of the record over real or supposed budget savings, you have some job security. If not, then it doesn’t matter if you’re the most professional and skilled reporter in any courtroom — your job will likely be affected at some point, if it hasn’t been already.

Because of those disparities, this article is not meant to be an all-encompassing overview of how officials are faring. Rather, it’s a snapshot of sorts of what’s happening in various parts of the country and how officials reporters are either adjusting or battling the changes that are being proposed to their jobs.

With that caveat in place, here’s a look at the good, the not-so-good, and the somewhere in-between for officials across the country.

TEXAS OFFERS OPPORTUNITIES

There were numerous states that declined the opportunity to participate in this story, with several suggesting these were far too sensitive times to talk about this issue publicly. But of the ones that did, you would be hard to find a place better to be an official court reporter these days than Texas.

While there had been a bit of chatter about electronic recording or reducing the number of officials in Texas in the past, none of it was serious and none has been that recent, says Glyn Poage, RDR, CRR, an official court reporter in Texas’s 166th District Court in Bexar County in the San Antonio area and NCRA Vice President.

“We really haven’t had to fight back because it hasn’t really happened that much,” Poage says. “The reason official reporters have done so well in Texas is that we have the support of our legislature and of the Supreme Court of Texas. It’s been a real team effort centered on protecting the record and protecting the rights of everyone involved in the legal system.”

Poage explained that the court reporters in Texas are all employed by counties that handle statutory as well as district court trials and hearings. “Each reporter is assigned to a particular judge. But if that judge is not in court for a reason, the court reporter will be assigned to another courtroom for that day,” he says, and adds that unlike other states, younger reporters can still aspire to become state officials, provided they’re willing to venture to the state’s more rural areas and work for a judge who’s covering three or four counties.

Because of their success in keeping official court reporters in the state’s courtrooms, Poage said he is occasionally asked by colleagues in other states for advice, and he has to concede there’s no secret strategy to Texas’s success.

“Some of it has to do with the fact that so many of our legislators are actual trial attorneys, and they don’t want have to track down a transcript from someone who’s not in the courthouse,” Poage says. “Also, our official reporters really do stress dependability and professionalism — Texas is a CSR state and the Supreme Court of Texas oversees the test and the certification.”

“It comes down to the fiscal responsibilities of those in charge. Court reporters really don’t make money decisions; we just do our job. In Texas, the legislature and the others who make funding decisions — and keep in mind that Texas is a growing state with a good economy — have handled it very well and been able to provide services for the residents of our state. It’s them, and it’s not us,” Poage says.

OREGON’S MIXED BAG

When electronic recording companies began making their cost saving pitch across the country in the 1990s and early 2000s, Oregon was one of the states that bought into it hook, line, and sinker. The state courts laid off most of the state’s official court reporters and installed electronic recording systems from For the Record, known by many as FTR. The clerks in the courtroom were given the additional duty of monitoring that equipment, making the recording, and labeling them and storing them.

There are still official reporters in Oregon’s federal courthouses, says Robin Nodland, RDR, CRR, of LNS Court Reporting and Videoconferencing, based in Portland, Ore. And not every case in Oregon is electronically recorded.

“If a particular litigant wants a reporter in the courtroom, they can hire them privately,” Nodland says. “So in reality, it’s been a cost shifting and not a cost savings.” She adds that in some civil cases, opposing counsels agree to split the cost for a reporter.

“When we go into a courtroom, there’s a form that we need to get all the parties to sign that stipulates that we are the official record — otherwise it’s the digital recording that is the official record. The other requirement is that you must be a certified shorthand reporter, which is our state designation, or a registered professional reporter, which is the NCRA certification, or higher.”

The removal of officials has provided a modest boost to court reporting firms in Oregon as they can now count on some trial work as part of their day-to-day business. “A lot of firms have reporters who used to do trial work as officials,” Nodland says. “They love trial work, and they love going back there and handling it. But it’s not a full-time job for any reporter.”

What’s stunning about Oregon is how quickly they got rid of their official court reporters, not just for run-of-the-mill traffic and misdemeanor cases, but for everything, including aggravated murder cases where the death penalty in a possibility. One high-profile Oregon murder case — that of Randy Guzek, convicted and sentenced to death for a 1987 double murder — led to decades of appeals centered on whether new evidence can be provided during the sentencing phase of a trial. Some of those appeals were in courtrooms where digital audio was used and the quality of those recordings was so poor, it triggered calls from the Oregon’s leading newspapers, the Oregonian, to bring back court reporters at the very least for capital murder trials. There is a bill currently before the Oregon Senate to require just that, but at our deadline, the bill’s fate remained uncertain.

MIDDLE GROUND

For most states, the situation for officials is far less draconian. Many still have official reporters, just not nearly at the numbers they were several years ago. New Jersey is a good example of this. “When I left my position as an official court reporter in 1996, there were 210 officials in New Jersey. Now we’re down to fewer than 40,” says Robert Boccolini, RPR, current president of the New Jersey Certified Court Reporters Association.

This decline in numbers has been slow but steady, and Boccolini says that it’s all attrition rather than lay-offs. “The state did have a plan a few years back to hire a few reporters who were either realtime certified or planning to become realtime in the next two years,” he says. “But that ended up adding fewer than 10 — and since then people who have retired have not been replaced.”

Virtually all of the remaining New Jersey officials are providing realtime for their judges, including one Newark reporter whose judge is hearing impaired. “If not for realtime, we would be gone,” Boccolini says. “It saved the jobs that are still there by making them more valuable.”

But because of their reduced numbers, New Jersey official reporters, all of whom are employed by the state rather than individual counties, tend to focus on only criminal cases, save for special circumstances such as highly complex civil trials with multiple litigants on both sides.

But as Boccolini says, “How can somebody make a decision that somebody’s civil case is less important than a criminal case. True, you could argue you’re not just going to lose your money [in a criminal case], you’re going to lose your liberty. But if you’re a plaintiff in a civil case, and you’ve got catastrophic injuries due to negligence in traffic accident, who says one trial isn’t as important as another?”

It was exactly that kind of issue that prompted the official court reporters in King County, Wash., to go to management to work out a method to prioritize criminal and civil cases, starting at the top on the criminal side with murder, serious assault, and rape, and then to cases involving young children because digital audio can’t often pick up their quiet voices. The priority then shifts to complex civil litigation that involve multiple attorneys asking for services such as daily transcripts, because it’s a lot harder to get transcripts from electronic recordings in an expedited fashion.

“In King County, it used to be a one-on-one: every judge had a court reporter. There were 39 reporters here about 10 years ago,” explained Michelle Vitrano, RDR, CRR, CPC, an official with King County for the past 23 years. “And then the budget started getting bad, and they installed more FTR. Now we have 11 reporters in downtown Seattle and four in our regional courthouse in Kent, so 15 total reporters for 55 judges.”

Vitrano says that when there is no court reporter available, the judge has to turn to electronic recording. “We’re unionized and we have fought very hard not to allow outside reporters into our courtrooms,” she says. “But we are losing two people this year, and it’s getting very busy. We’re running from court to court, and we’re all providing realtime. So it’s crazy around here, but we are still employed.”

Other counties — all official reporters in Washington state are employed by the county and not the state — seem to doing as well if not better than King County. Vitrano suggests the worst may be over, saying: “They’ve pretty well got all the cost savings they can out of us.”

For other states, success is measured by how close they’ve been able to maintain the status quo.

In Tennessee, for instance, officials organized quickly to beat back an attempt by the state Administrative Office of the Courts in 2010 to first replace staff official reporters with contract reporters hired on a per diem basis and then eventually replace those workers with contract workers who would monitor electronic recordings.

“The officials gathered as much information and documentation as possible, in the limited time we had to work with, regarding outcomes in other states that had eliminated officials in the past and presented it to our judges,” says one official who requested anonymity. “The judges were extremely supportive of the official reporters and resisted this attempt by the AOC to eliminate reporters from the criminal courts. We were eventually notified that there would not be any further cuts at that time. Personally, I think they were surprised by the strong resistance they encountered from the judges.”

Even with that victory, fewer than 30 official court reporters remain employed by the state and none work in civil court. If attorneys want something other than a digital audio recording, they have to hire a reporter privately to come in for that trial or hearing. But for now at least there are no plans to eliminate any more official positions, the source adds, “I think our judges are the reason Tennessee still has court reporters in the courts today.”

Some states are seeing a change even now. In 2009, due to budgetary issues, many Iowa state court employees, including reporters, were laid off due to budget constraints. As of July 1, however, Iowa has been advertising that it wants to fill 12 court reporter positions across the state. “Iowa reporters have worked hard at being team players within the judicial branch. Our Supreme Court officials, as well as many district associate, and juvenile judges, and the state bar, support and value steno reporters. The addition of 12 new positions is proof of that,” says Sarah Hyatt, RPR, of Cedar Rapids, Iowa, current president of the Iowa Court Reporters Association. “And when Iowa’s budget was finally able to more fully fund the courts, we were thrilled that the decision was made to hire additional qualified reporters.”

 

California and the wild west of court systems

California may no longer be the Wild West, but you wouldn’t know by looking at the state’s court system and both how and when transcripts and the official record are being created there.

Thanks to a concerted lobbying and legal effort led by groups such as the California Court Reporters Association, there is very little electronic recording in California county courts, and most of the ER is used for misdemeanors and traffic hearings.

But the success in keeping digital audio out hasn’t prevented some county governments in the state from laying off some — or in the case of Placer County, all — of its official court reporters. The result right now is that California has a little bit of everything. Placer County, for instance, has outsourced all its trial work to a single private court reporting firm after a bidding process.

Los Angeles County, like other California counties, has laid off a portion of its official reporters, largely in civil courts, forcing attorneys who want a record and a transcript to hire a private court reporter.

“Officials are definitely out in some counties,” says Kristi Garcia, a Fresno County official court reporter and current CCRA president. “Not in all counties but in some counties, they’ve taken reporters out of family law courts. But independent reporters can go in there, so that’s a win for court reporters. We’re just glad there’s a court reporter in the courtroom and not electronic recording.”

The reason for that victory was a lawsuit against California’s Administrative Office of the Courts for putting in electronic recording in courtrooms when it didn’t have the funding to do so from the state legislature, a case that went all the way to the California Supreme Court. Garcia notes that in misdemeanor courts, there is some electronic recording, but all felonies still must be reported by a court reporter. “For civil trials, they all bring in their own,” she says, adding that for probate and for family law, there may not be either digital audio or a live court reporter. “Sometimes there’s no record at all because there is no reporter and they’re not recording. So when you’re fighting for your kid in family court, there’s going to be no record.”

The lack of certainty about whether a trial will have a record is triggering some angst in the state’s legal community, says Sandy Bunch VanderPol, RMR, CRR, an independent reporter in Lotus, Calif. “A lot of the attorneys are getting frustrated because they would rather have something in there, but they don’t want to pay to have a court reporter,” says VanderPol.

But for VanderPol, whose resume includes stints as CCRA president as well as being both a firm owner and independent reporter, all these changes in how trials are reported recently gave her the opportunity to do something once considered rare for a private independent reporter: She handled a case for a client from start to finish, beginning with the depositions and running all the way through the trial.

She’s not alone. “I have a very good client base for depositions and that’s what I would prefer to do, but there are a lot of reporters that are now doing trials along with depositions,” VanderPol says. While no one will admit it for attribution, the presence of independent reporters in trials doing a job that used be handled by an official has, on occasion, generated some tension, though not recently. “When the client of the depo reporter asks them to come in and do the trial, and the officials that were in that courthouse see that, they’ve became upset, so it was a big deal,” says one reporter who requested anonymity to speak freely about this topic. “Now everyone can see the big picture and realize they shouldn’t be mad at their own profession; we should be mad at the people laying us off.”

Notably, the layoffs that have impacted California officials hasn’t really changed the demand for good trial reporting. “It’s not that there’s less need for reporters in courtrooms,” VanderPol says. “It’s just that we’re doing our jobs differently because now you have to get hired by a litigant rather than being on salary by the court.” But it is starting to create some downward price pressure as exofficials compete with both firms and independent reporters for trial work. “These days you’ve got to cut a lot of deals to get any business,” says one source. The other big change is that ex-official reporters are now beginning to think and act like small businesspeople rather than California government employees.

 

Secrets of success – Joyce and Bob Zaro: Have desire to learn and be a team player

Joyce K. Zaro, RPR, and Bob A. Zaro, RPR, are owners of Zaro+Zaro Realtime Reporting, LLC, and they live in Tigard, Ore., a town nine miles southwest of downtown Portland. Bob and Joyce have worked together in every aspect of reporting. As official reporters in state court for 23 years, they sometimes shared trials, proofread for each other, and even shared an antique double-sided desk in their courthouse office. In 2002, when the state’s layoff of officials began, they jumped into the deposition world, with Bob working as an employee for an established reporting firm and Joyce working as an overflow deposition reporter for multiple firms, a CART reporter, and a broadcast captioner. Prior to working together, the two met at Bryan College in Los Angeles, Calif., where they completed their education in 1979.

What made you decide to start your business?

Bob: Ten years ago, owning a business was not at all in our long-range plan. We both were very happy in this new experience of working outside the courtroom, which gave us quite a renewed enthusiasm for reporting. It was refreshing to have our skill and experience appreciated after fighting so long to try to convince the court administration that we realtime reporters, an integral part of the court’s team, were more efficient and useful than electronic recording, despite the impending budget cuts.

Joyce: A great benefit of my being an overflow deposition reporter was getting to know and work with many reporters, from one-reporter firms to the large national companies, all of them run with their own style. I learned a great deal during those first five years A.C. — after the courthouse, as we now call it. I know now those experiences prepared me for what was in store next. In 2003, I was blessed to connect with a wonderful, respected reporter in Portland, and I become a regular sub for her. She had built her business over the past 20 years by giving personal, friendly service and providing an excellent product. The clients she attracted were similar in personality, and it was a delight to report for them. When she decided to retire in 2008, I was presented the amazing opportunity to take over her business.

As business owners, what have been the challenges? The rewards?

Joyce: Since Bob was still employed with the other firm, my first challenge was just hoping I could continue my mentor’s previous success. The learning curve was steep as I navigated scheduling, invoicing, and paying reporters who were now subbing for me, and general organization of the business. Bob finally joined me, and we started working together again, which is the biggest reward!

Bob: Working together again is indeed the best reward. It has also been rewarding to build our team with like-minded reporters and production help so we can provide the best service possible. One big challenge we face daily is trying to balance work and everyday life. Because we are so used to working on transcripts at all hours of the day and night, weekends, and holidays, there is not a nonreporter spouse who says, “Okay. Enough for now. Let’s go do something else.”

How important is networking to building a business and becoming successful? Can you provide some examples of good networking that could help court reporters?

Bob: Networking to find fellow reporters to help you is a crucial part of building your business. We know this because Joyce and I benefitted from it when we left the courthouse. If we hadn’t participated in our state association as official reporters, we would have missed out on meeting and forming great relationships with the deposition reporters in our state, who graciously helped us make a smooth transition out of court.

Joyce: Unless you happen to arrive at the same deposition, freelance reporters generally don’t see each other outside of state or national association conferences. As a result, relationships formed while we network and learn and share are so important, such as when we need help covering a job, an answer to a procedural question, or if a student needs mentoring. Our common goal is to provide excellent service to the attorneys, and if we can work together to accomplish that, it helps everyone’s business succeed.

How important are credentials and continued education in becoming successful?

Bob: Keeping current with technology is the cornerstone of being a successful reporter. We started by typing transcripts on onion skin paper with carbon paper for copies. We now can wirelessly transmit our transcripts to an attorney’s iPad. Without continuing education to keep us informed of new developments and helping us implement them, we would have been left behind. Learning never ends with this job, and the challenge keeps it interesting.

Joyce: Absolutely. And, like Bob said, the interesting challenge is what has kept me taking tests. I do not enjoy it, like some, but the personal realtime challenge I gave myself was enough to keep me going. I believe it makes a big difference when another reporter or a scheduling paralegal can see that you have met standard requirements for competency. Even though Oregon is not a state with mandatory certification, we encourage all new reporters to keep taking those tests until they pass them.

What few adjectives would you use to describe a successful court reporter?

Joyce: Someone with keen attention to detail, who is self-disciplined and motivated, with a desire to be a team player.

Bob: Possess good common sense; be professional, yet friendly; have a desire to learn; believe in service before self.

Any final comments on getting where you are today?

We will be forever grateful to Nancy Patterson and our dedicated teachers who poured their experience and knowledge into us to prepare us so well.

 Do you want to nominate someone for the “Secrets of Success” series? Send your pick into the JCR’s Writer/Editor, Linda Smolkin, at lsmolkin@ncra.org.