DAN MORALES 

.ATTORSEY CNER.AL 

@ffice of tly Qttornep f&meral 

&ate of &exae 

April lo,1992 

Honorable Merrill L Hartman 

Chairman 

Opinion No. DM-102 

Court Reporters Certification Board 

P. 0. Box 13131 

Austin, Texas 78711-3131 

Re: Whether a certified shorthand 

reporter in the State of .Texas may 

contract with a company to fulfill all 

of the company’s shorthand reporting 

needs (RQ-263) 

Dear Judge Hartman: 

You ask about the permissibility of a certified shorthand reporter 

(hereinafter CSR) contracting with a company to provide all of the shorthand 

reporting services the company needs. We are informed that under this type of 

contractual arrangement, the contracting company, often an insurance company, 

instructs the attorneys who represent it to use only the CSR who has contracted with 

the company. The CSR discounts his or her usual fee in return for the company’s 

promise to exclusively use the CSR. You are concerned that such a contractual 

arrangement will affect the CSR’s impartiality Andy lead to inequitable billing 

practices and fraudulent conduct. 

Under chapter 52 of the Government Code, a “shorthand reporter” is a 

person who, using written symbols in shorthand, machine shorthand, or oral 

stenography, makes a verbatim record of an oral court proceeding, deposition, or 

proceeding before a grand jury, referee, or court commissioner for use in litigation 

in the courts of this state. Gov’t Code 5 52.001(4), (5). Except in very limited 

circumstances, a person may not engage in shorthand reporting unless the Texas 

Supreme Court has certified the person as a shorthand reporter.1 Id 3 52.021(b); 

see id. $6 52.021- 52.024 (discussing requirements for certification). CSRs are 

IA nonwrtified shortband reporter may record an oral deposition only when a certifrcd 

shorthand reporter is uwailable. Gov’t Code 3 52.031. 

p. 518 
Honorable Merrill L’Hartman - Page 2 (DM-102 1 

certified and governed ,according to rules the Texas Supreme Court has 

promulgated. Id 9 52.002. 

CSRs work generally as independent contractors, recording depositions and 

other proceedings in numerous lawsuits for a number of law firms and other 

companies involved in’ lawsuits, such as insurance companies. A CSR usually 

charges, on a per page basis, the party asking the first question at the deposition. 

See TEX. R. CTV. P. 206. Other parties may purchase copies of the deposition 

transcript from the CSR. Neither the statutes nor the rules promulgated by the 

Supreme Court of Texas (hereinafter the rules) require a CSR to take or sign an 

oath upon certification, The rules do, however, require a CSR to certify on every 

transcription of any oral court proceeding, deposition or 

proceeding before a grand jury, referee or court commissioner, 

or any other document certified by a certified shorthand 

reporter for use in litigation in the courts of Texas,. . . the 

signature, address and telephone number of the certified 

shorthand reporter and his or her State certification number and 

the date of expiration of certification. 

Texas Supreme Court Standards and Rules for Certification of Certified Shorthand 

Reporters pt. I(I)(l) (unpublished, on file with the Court Reporters CertiGcation 

Board). The rules further require a CSR to certify on each transcription that it is a 

“true and correct transcription” of the proceeding transcribed. Id 

We find nothing in the statutes or the rules expressly prohibiting a 

contractual arrangement between a CSR and a company or organization in which 

the CSR agrees to fulfill all of the company’s shorthand reporting needs. However, 

you attach to your request letter copies of several deposition forms containing 

statements to which other state and federal courts require a CSR to certify,2 

apparently to illustrate that a CSR has a duty to, remain neutral. For example, 

2You have submitted copies of forms setting forth language to which CSRs in different states 

must certify. We understand that you have copied most of the forms from a book printed by the 

National Shorthand Reporters’ Association (we arc unaware of which particular edition you copied the 

fonts from). The forms you have copied arc for the folbving courts: United State4 District Court; 

United States Patent Of&; United States Board of Tax Appcalq and the state courts of Indiana, 

Michigan, New York, Tennessee, and Wyoming. See gcnemUy Committee on Dqwsition Forms, National Shorthand Reporters’ Association (1971). 

p. 519 
Honorable Merrill L Hartman - Page 3 (DM-102 ) 

depositions taken in a federal proceeding may not be taken by “a person who is a 

relative or employee or attorney or counsel of any of the parties, or is a relative or 

employee of such attorney or counsel, or is financially interested in the action,“3 and 

the CSR must certify to this on each transcription. See =D. R. CIV. P. 28(c). 

Neither Texas statutes nor the rules require CSRs in Texas state court proceedings 

to certi@ a statement similar to the above-quoted statement; in addition, we do not 

find any provisions expressly prohibiting CSRs from being employed by, or having a 

relationship of interest with, a party to the lawsuit.4 Consequently, we cannot 

conclude on the basis of Texas statutory and regulatory law that CSRs who enter 

into a contractual relationship with a company are violating an express statute or 

rule. 

We are advised that the National Court Reporters’ Association Code of 

Professional Responsibility requires a court reporter to avoid any appearance of 

conflict of interest., to conduct himself with impartiality toward all participants in 

every case, and to disclose any existing or past financial, business, professional 

family or social relationships which might reasonably create an appearance of 

impartiality. Additionally, we are advised that the Texas Court Reporters’ 

Association Code of Professional Conduct requires court reporters to be fair and 

impartial during all reported proceedings. Interpretation of these professional rules 

is beyond the purview of this office. Thus, we do not decide whether these 

provisions, enacted by the national and state court reporters’ associations, prohibit 

%Je understand that the issue of whether a contract with a party such as the contracts at issue 

here coostitutcs an employment relatiooship or indicates a IkaociaI interest, either direct or indirect, in 

the action has not yet been determined by an adjudicative body. 

‘It has been suggested that because section 52059(a) of the Government Code provides that 

the “attorney who takes a deposition and the attomey’s firm are jointly and -aIIy Liable for a 

[CSR’s] charges’ for rcportiw and transcrii the deposition and for cacb copy of the deposition 

transcript the attorney requests, a company that is not a law fum caanot pay the CSR even tbougb the 

fum has contracted with the CSR to pay the CSR directly for shorthand reporting services. In our 

opinion, section 52.059(a) mandates that the attorney takiog tbc dcpostion and the attorneys firm are 

respons13~le to pay the CSR when the attorneys dient, or any other person who may have agreed to 

pay, r&sea to do so. Indeed, we note that the bii aaalysis for Senate Bii 858, which became section 

52.059, indicates that the legislature designed the bii to remedy the problem resuking when the 

attorney and the dent both refuse to pay the CSR. House Comm. On State Affairs, Bii Analysis, S.B. 

g5& M Leg. (1991). Thus, the legislature did not intend the section to provide that the attorney and 

the attomcy’s fim are the only entities who are permitted to pay CSR’s biIIs, and we believe that the 

language of section 52059(a) is co&tent with that intent. 

p. 520 
. 

Honorable Merrill L Hartman - Page 4 (DM-102 1 

or restrict a shorthand reporter’s ability to contract with companies to fulfill all of 

the company’s shorthand reporting needs. 

To the extent that a CSR violates state statutes and regulations, the statutes 

and rules provide means through which the Court Reporters Certification Board 

(hereinafter the board) can sanction the CSR. See Gov’t Code $4 52.027 - 52.030 

(establishing requirements for verified ~complaints, notice and hearing, disciplinary 

actions, and appeal of disciplinary action); Texas Supreme Court, Standards and 

Rules for Certification of Certified Shorthand Reporters pt. IV (same). For 

example, the rules require a CSR to certify on every transcription that the transcript 

he or she has prepared is a “true and correct transcription.” Texas Supreme Court, 

rupra pt. I(I)(l). If a CSR violates the duty to prepare a “true and correct” 

transcript, presumably the CSR would be subject to disciplinary action from the 

board for dishonesty, failure of duty, and unprofessional conduct. Under the rules, 

such disciplinary action may include revoking or suspending the CSR’s certification. 

Gov’t Code 3 52.029; Texas Supreme Court, supru pt. IV(A). Whether a CSR 

committed dishonest or unprofessional conduct in a particular situation, thereby 

violating the statutes and the rules, as a result of a contractual arrangement with a 

company involves the resolution of factual issues, a task the statute assigns to the 

board. 

It also has been suggested that to make up for the discounted service charge 

billed to the contracting company, a CSR may charge other parties to the action 

excessive fees for copies of transcriptions. Further, it has been suggested that the 

kind of contractual arrangement at issue here may result in fraudulent conduct in 

that the court reporter may indicate an amount to be taxed as court cost when “the 

court reporter has actually not charged the contracted party anything for the taxable 

portion of the depositions.” Again, the statutes and the rules expressly proscribe 

fraudulent, dishonest, or unprofessional conduct, and wilful or negligent violations 

of duty. Gov’t Code 8 52.029(a); Texas Supreme Court, supru. If the board finds a 

CSR guilty of such conduct, the CSR is subject to disciplinary action, which may 

consist of revocation or suspension of the CSR’s certification. Gov’t Code, supru; 

Texas Supreme Court, mpm. 

In short, we find no state statutory or regulatory provision expressly 

prohibiting CSRs from entering into a contractual arrangement with a company, 

pursuant to which a CSR agrees to fulfill all of the contracting company’s shorthand 

reporting needs. Section 52.029 of the Government Code liits various types of 

behavior for which the board may sanction ‘a CSR, including fraud and 

p. 521 
Honorable Merrill L Hartman - Page S ( DM- 102 ) 

unprofessional conduct, but the determination of whether a CSR in a particular 

contractual arrangement is committing any of the proscribed types of behavior is a 

determination the board must make according to the procedures set forth in 

sections 52.027 through 52.030 of the Government Code and part IV of the rules 

promulgated by the Texas Supreme Court. 

SUMMARY 

Neither Texas statutes nor rules promulgated by the Texas 

Supreme Court preclude a certified shorthand reporter in the 

State of Texas from contracting with a company to provide all of 

the shorthand reporting services the company requires. Section 

52.029 of the Government Code lists various types of behavior 

for which the Court Reporters Certification Board may sanction 

a certified shorthand reporter, including fraud and 

unprofessional conduct, but the determination of whether a 

certified shorthand reporter in a particular contractual 

arrangement is committing any of the proscribed types of 

behavior is a determination the Court Reporters Certification 

Board must make according to the procedures set forth in 

sections 52.027 through 52.030 of the Government Code and 

part IV of the Standards and Rules for Certification of Certified 

Shorthand Reporters, promulgated by the Supreme Court of 

Texas. 

Very truly yours, 

DAN MORALES 

Attorney General of Texas 

p. 522 
Honorable Merrill L Hartman - Page 6 (DM- 102 1 

WILL PRYOR 

First Assistant Attorney General 

MARY SLLER 

Deputy Assistant Attorney General 

RENEAHIcKs 

Special Assistant Attorney General 

MADELEINE B. JOHNSON 

Chair, Opinion Committee 

Prepared by Kymberly Oltrogge 

Assistant Attorney General 

p. 523