FIFTEEN COURT STENOGRAPHERS have filed suit to block the Judicial Branch’s planned elimination of their jobs in the state Superior Court effective by the end of June. The court system plans to replace the reporters with digital recording equipment overseen by lower-paid, non-professional-level court employees called monitors.

The court issued an administrative order March 12 disclosing that it intended to eliminate all of the official reporter positions in June. Earlier in the year, court officials said they planned to phase out the positions through attrition and retirements. Among other allegations, the lawsuit, filed in Superior Court by attorney David Nixon, alleges that as early as October 2003 the court told legislators that it intended to eliminate all of the jobs in the coming budget year. The reporters were notified via email in March that their jobs were slated for elimination.

"This was a job I thought I’d have for the rest of my working life," said one of the plaintiffs, Lori Patria, a reporter for 19 years, who is currently assigned to the Cheshire County courthouse. The lawsuit contends that as late as Feb. 27 the reporters were "reassured" that their jobs were not being terminated. The reporters were already upset that their income had been cut by the court’s decision to end its past practice of allowing the reporters to collect fees for producing transcripts on their own time. In an administrative order last August, the court system mandated that transcripts be done during the regular work day or be outsourced to transcription services, and that the transcription fees be collected by the court system. That led the court reporters to begin exploring a collective bargaining affiliation with the State Employees’ Association in the fall. Ballots in the representation election were sent out to the 16 reporters currently on staff earlier this month, Patria said.

Patria further stated that the court system’s move to eliminate the reporters comes at a time when demand for transcripts is increasing— and the timing of their production is critical to litigators with cases in the appeals process. (See Jan. 9, 2004 issue of Bar News for coverage of this issue.) The court’s change in appellate policy, effective Jan. 1, 2004, opens the door to many more potential appellants—all of whom will be required to submit trial transcripts. Although Patria, based in one of the smallest counties, said she does not currently have a backlog, another reporter, who asked to remain anonymous, told Bar News that she had a backlog of more than 1,500 pages to transcribe, and that she is not being relieved of courtroom duties to complete her transcribing.

The reporters’ request for an injunction to stop the court from eliminating their jobs was filed in Hillsborough County Superior Court, Northern District, on April 6. It was assigned to retired Justice Philip Holman, and a preliminary hearing was scheduled for April 22.

An audit of the judicial branch conducted last year by the Legislative Budget Assistant (LBA), the legislature’s auditing office, estimated that the pay, benefits, and mileage expenses paid to official court stenographers costs an average of $297 per day, while using monitors to staff the court would cost about $150 per day. The savings would more than offset the expense of training and adding the digital recording equipment. The court indicated that the LBA’s findings helped spur the court’s decision to move ahead with elimination of the reporters’ jobs.

A spokesperson for the court system said the court would have no comment because of the pending litigation.

Nixon, Martin F. Loughlin, and Leslie Nixon are representing the plaintiffs. The lawsuit asks that the court system be enjoined from discharging the reporters except for "just cause" for "poor job performance or misconduct only."

The state of Oregon has switched most of its courts to digital recording systems and replaced its reporters, touching of a rising tide of complaints. A Feb. 8, 2004, article in the Oregonian newspaper described an incident when an hour of key prosecution testimony was found missing from a 2003 murder trial, as well as other incidents of gaps in recordings of trials.

Home | About the Bar | For Members | For the Public | Legal Links | Publications | Online Store
Lawyer Referral Service | Law-Related Education | NHBA•CLE | NHBA Insurance Agency | NHMCLE
Search | Calendar

New Hampshire Bar Association
2 Pillsbury Street, Suite 300, Concord NH 03301
phone: (603) 224-6942 fax: (603) 224-2910
email: NHBAinfo@nhbar.org
© NH Bar Association Disclaimer