Amendments to Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.070—Court Reporters

725 So. 2d 1094, 24 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 8, 1998 Fla. LEXIS 2522, 1998 WL 906312
CourtSupreme Court of Florida
DecidedDecember 24, 1998
DocketNo. 92,300
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 725 So. 2d 1094 (Amendments to Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.070—Court Reporters) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Amendments to Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.070—Court Reporters, 725 So. 2d 1094, 24 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 8, 1998 Fla. LEXIS 2522, 1998 WL 906312 (Fla. 1998).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The Court Repox-ter Certification Planning Committee has petitioned this Court to adopt proposed rules for certification and regulation of court reporters and to amend Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.070 to implement the proposed certification rules. We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 2(a), Fla. Const. For the reasons expressed, we adopt the Committee’s proposals subject to the legislature’s providing funds for the initial costs of implementing the program.

Background

In 1990, the legislature enacted section 29.025, Florida Statutes (since recodified as section 25.383, Florida Statutes (1997)), directing this Court to establish minimum standards and procedures for qualifications, certification, discipline, and training for court reporters. The statute provides that the Court may set fees for certification and renewal to offset the costs of administration of the certification process. It also allows the Court to appoint or employ personnel to assist the Court in such regulation.

When rules and policies for such a process were initially proposed, this Court rejected them. See In re Amendments to Florida Rules of Judicial Administration-Rule 2.070(a), (b), (c), and (d)-Certification and Regulation of Court Reporters, 595 So.2d 928 (Fla.1992) (Certification opinion). This Court approved the process in concept but had concerns regarding training requirements, review of disciplinary actions of a proposed court reporter certification board, possible adverse effects on existing local procedures, grandfather clauses, funding, and the alternative of a national process. Subsequently, in November 1995, this Court established by administrative order a “Court Reporter Certification Planning Committee” to evaluate the feasibility and alternatives for a certification process for court reporters as authorized by section 25.383 and to propose relevant rules and administrative policies. In carrying out its responsibilities, the committee was directed to consider the proposed rules and materials considered by this Court in the Certification opinion, and to receive input from interested persons. The committee was directed to petition this Court for adoption of the proposed rules and related policies that it developed. Subsequently, the committee submitted its petition as directed, that petition was published in The Florida Bar News for comments, and comments were received.

According to the committee’s petition, it reached an early consensus that a mandatory certification program was necessary to ensure minimum standards of proficiency and that no interim program was warranted. The committee also stated that it has worked diligently to develop proposed rules and policies for the certification process, has consulted all of the various other rules committees, and has received input from numerous organizations and individuals. In brief, the committee proposes to amend rule 2.070 to implement the requirements of the program and create new rules, which will be numbered 13.010, et seq.; provide necessary definitions; establish the scope and purpose of the rules; create the Florida Court Reporter [1095]*1095Certification Board, which will be responsible for administering the program; provide directions for the application process; establish minimum qualifications; provide for development and administration of an examination for applicants; establish a waiver of the examination in certain circumstances; provide for the issuance of certificates and renewal of certificates; require continuing education; provide ethical guidelines; establish criteria for disciplinary procedures, hearings, dispositions, and review; and provide reinstatement guidelines following suspension or revocation.

The comments overwhelmingly favor the adoption of the rules in concept.1 However, the comments received raised two issues regarding the adoption of the rules: (1) whether all applicants who have not been certified previously through an approved certification process should be required to pass an appropriate examination; and (2) whether a new rule should be adopted to prohibit court reporters from charging different fees for “appellate transcripts” than for “trial transcripts.”

Grandfather Provision Issue

The committee and the comments received were divided as to the first issue, concerning the examination requirement. Under the rules as proposed, a waiver of the examination requirement is provided for (1) anyone holding a current certificate that, in the opinion of the board, is “substantially similar” to the certificates issued in this state; or (2) anyone holding a certificate issued after testing by the National Court Reporters Association; the National Stenomask Verbatim Reporters Association; or other organization that, in the opinion of the board, issues a test which reflects a similar level of proficiency. A minority of the committee members as well as the Florida Court Reporters Association have asked this Court to modify the proposed rules to provide for a more liberal “grandfather provision,” to allow experienced court reporters to exempt the examination requirement even if they do not meet these waiver provisions. They contend that experienced court reporters should be allowed to waive or be grandfathered from the examination requirements because other professions and other states have done so and because the absence of such a waiver or grandfather provision may put many experienced court reporters who specialize in one area at a disadvantage on the general skills examination.

As the committee noted in its petition, a liberal grandfather provision is irreconcilable with the justification for the mandatory certification program, which is to eliminate unqualified court reporters. Such a grandfather provision would enfranchise unqualified reporters and would fail to protect the courts and the public. That other professions have grandfather provisions does not justify the implementation of such a provision here. Many years ago, when this Court was first asked to require that all applicants seeking admission to the practice of law have a college degree and have graduated from an approved law school, we rejected that requirement, finding that other means of obtaining experience for admission to the practice of law should be permitted. See Petition of Florida State Bar Association, 134 Fla. 851, 186 So. 280 (1938). Nevertheless, we still required all applicants to have the equivalent of a high school education and to have completed approved courses in the study of law; we did not allow admission based on experience alone.

In this case, there has been no previous licensing of court reporters in Florida and there has been no minimum educational requirement for court reporters. Were we to allow experience to serve as the sole basis for exempting applicants from the examination requirement, we would be undermining the basic purpose of the certification program. We believe that the committee’s proposal provides a sufficient grandfather provision by allowing a waiver of the examination requirement for those court reporters who have obtained certificates through programs “substantially similar” to the Florida program or [1096]*1096through an organization that administers an examination with a level of proficiency similar to the Florida examination. Notably, we do not believe our adoption of the committee’s position will create a shortage of certified court reporters in Florida.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Amendments to the Florida Rules of Judicial Administration
780 So. 2d 819 (Supreme Court of Florida, 2000)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
725 So. 2d 1094, 24 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 8, 1998 Fla. LEXIS 2522, 1998 WL 906312, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/amendments-to-florida-rule-of-judicial-administration-2070court-reporters-fla-1998.