Court reporters are present at trials, hearings such as peer reviews, depositions, and interviews. Is it sensible to replace them with digital recorders?

1. www.mosmedicalrecordreview.com (800) 670 2809
How Sensible Is It to Replace Court
Reporters with Audio Recording Devices?
Court reporters are present at trials,
hearings such as peer reviews, depositions
and interviews. Is it sensible to replace them
with digital recorders?
MOS Medical Record Reviews
8596 E. 101st Street, Suite H
Tulsa, OK 74133

2. www.mosmedicalrecordreview.com (800) 670 2809
Recent news highlighted the fact that under a Wisconsin state agency budget request,
audio recording devices could replace court reporters in certain administrative hearings
including workers’ compensation trials. As per the report, a provision in the Department of
Administration’s 2017-19 biennial budget request calls to “eliminate the requirement that
the Division of Hearings and Appeals have a court reporter at every hearing and implement
electronic record of hearings.” The DHA or Division of Hearings and Appeals conducts
administrative hearings on disputes involving 15 state agencies. It is an independent entity
that is “attached” to the DOA (Department of Administration), which controls its budget.
Both plaintiff and defense counsel oppose the above proposal.
This brings us to the role of a court reporter and how important this person is in a legal
setting. Though often a silent member of a courtroom witnessing and recording court
proceedings and also present on other occasions such as peer reviews, a court reporter
captures the legal proceedings verbatim as part of the court record. In fact, his/her role is
essential in recording and preserving all of the argument and testimony offered, as well as
all of the words spoken by the judge. The transcript prepared by the court reporter was an
indispensable component in any court case. Experts believe that excluding court reporters
from DHA hearings, especially in workers’ compensation cases, would be a bad idea.
Before 2016, all disputed workers’ compensation matters were exclusively arbitrated by
administrative law judges within the Workers’ Compensation Division of the DWD
(Department of Workforce Development). Workers’ compensation matters were moved to
the DHA by the 2015-17 state budget. The main concern bar groups have is regarding
preserving accurate records in these types of cases that usually involve high dollar
amounts. Moreover, often parties appeal adverse decisions and these require a transcript
of the proceedings. In these trials, court reporters are essential.
Importance of Court Reporters
 To obtain an accurate and clean record of courtroom proceedings, a court
reporter’s presence is essential.
 An audio recording of a trial cannot carry out the functions of a court reporter. A
recorder cannot distinguish who the speaker is, or request witnesses to speak more
loudly/clearly and is not guaranteed to function properly. Even intelligible
recordings would require transcription.
 Court reporters capture the testimony that is sworn under oath, and handle
evidence.

3. www.mosmedicalrecordreview.com (800) 670 2809
 Even the best quality recorder cannot actually substitute a court reporter who can
work with all the parties involved and ensure everything is well-managed and
accurate.
 If initial decisions are appealed, the reviewing tribunal would request an accurate
record of the proceedings. If reviews of workers’ compensation decisions are audio
taped and then have to go through the circuit court, appeals court, and the state
supreme court, you would not know who was saying what.
 Another issue is when the parties talk in a low voice or are unintelligible. A court
reporter can always ask witnesses to speak louder or repeat something that is not
clear. This is not possible with an audio device.
 Attorneys may be concerned about the digital recordings because they may have
experienced problems when court reporters were not involved.
 Technology can create problems. If the recorder stops working and the judge
doesn’t notice that, problems can arise. The right microphones and other
necessary devices are required for efficient and accurate recording.
 Court reporters receive knowledge-based training and they are well-acquainted
with legal and medical terminology. If you don’t understand the terms used, the
transcripts may be inaccurate.
 Getting transcripts from a recording can be expensive.
How Court Reporters Work
Most court reporters use steno machines to transcribe the proceedings as an electronic
file. When there is a request for a transcript, the court reporter would use suitable
software to translate the shorthand and then edit from there. There are certified court
reporters who use software to produce real-time transcripts for judges who want that.
Court reporters may also digitally record the spoken word. However, they would make
sure that the equipment is working properly throughout the procedure. This is not possible
when the recording device is left on its own. When court reporters use such digital
recorders, they would later listen to the audio to create the transcript.
When is it practical to use audio recording as a substitute for a court reporter? For lower
level cases such as small claims cases or non-jailable offences when a court reporter is not
available. In such cases, often a transcript may not be required or requested. But higher
level cases such as workers’ compensation definitely requires the service and practical
intelligence of a court reporter. As providers of medical review solutions to workers’

4. www.mosmedicalrecordreview.com (800) 670 2809
compensation lawyers, we know that these cases are complex, and there may be many
disputed facts. Moreover, the testimony could be spread out over months or even years.
Budget Constraints Forcing State Court Systems to Eliminate Court Reporters
Though the practicality of replacing court reporters with digital audio recorders in higher
level cases is being questioned from various quarters, government agencies may consider
this option increasingly because of limited budgets. The National Center for State Courts
notes in one of their 2015 publications that a number of states and territories have
transitioned to digital recordings in their courts. In Wisconsin, some courts have started
using digital audio recording in rural and other areas where court reporters are
unavailable.