Search 

Azcourts.gov

Arizona Judicial Branch



FAQ

Register       Login

ATTENTION: This site has been recently moved. If you had an account on our old forum site, you will have to register a new account here in order to be able to post replies.

 

NEW! The Court acted on many pending rule petitions at its August 29, 2017 Rules Agenda.  

Click on the Amendments from Recent Rules Agendas link below to go directly to the amendments and orders for each one.

Message from the Chief Justice

Current Arizona Rules 

Amendments from Recent Rule Agendas

Rule Amendments (2006 to present) 

Advisory Committee on Rules of Evidence


Pending Rules List

         Proposed Local Rules
                 Welcome!
This website allows you to electronically file and monitor court rule petitions and comments and to view existing rules of court, recent amendments of those rules, and pending rule petitions and comments. Any visitor to this site may view posts on this website, but to post a petition or comment you must register and log in. To view instructions on how to register and how to file a petition or comment, please visit our Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) page. 
PrevPrev Go to previous topic
NextNext Go to next topic
Last Post 19 Jun 2006 05:23 PM by  lkoschney
R-05-0037 Petition to Amend Various Rules of Procedure Relating to Verbatim Recording of Judicial Proceedings.
 62 Replies
Sort:
Topic is locked
Page 1 of 41234 > >>
Author Messages
ggraham
Posts:

--
18 Apr 2006 03:22 PM
    R-05-0037

    PETITION TO AMEND VARIOUS RULES OF PROCEDURE RELATING TO VERBATIM RECORDING OF JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS

    TO MODERNIZE LANGUAGE IN EXISTING RULES AND TO ESTABLISH STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES APPEARING IN STATUTES

    Petitioner:
    Jennifer A. Greene, Committee Staff
    Committee on Keeping the Record
    Court Programs Unit – Court Services Division
    Administrative Office of the Courts
    Arizona Supreme Court
    1501 W. Washington, Suite 410
    Phoenix, AZ 85007-3222
    (602) 542-9555
    jgreene@courts.az.gov
    Arizona Bar No. 015760

    Filed December 12, 2006.

    THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS WERE ADOPTED AS MODIFIED, EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, 2007. SEE ORDER AT NEW RULE AMENDMENTS AND COURT ACTION FROM THE SEPTEMBER 11, 2006, RULES AGENDA ON THE COURT RULES WEBSITE.
    Attachments
    ggraham
    Posts:

    --
    20 Apr 2006 01:03 PM
    Re: Keeping the Record Final Report [Hon Gary E Donahoe]
    Attachments
    ggraham
    Posts:

    --
    20 Apr 2006 01:04 PM
    Comment on Petition [JoJene Mills]
    Attachments
    ggraham
    Posts:

    --
    02 May 2006 10:12 AM
    [Comments] [Borowiec & Borowiec, P.C. by Joel P. Borowiec]
    Attachments
    ggraham
    Posts:

    --
    02 May 2006 10:14 AM
    [Comments] Response to Rule 28 Petition to Allow Electronic Recording Versus Court Reporters [Leslie A. Baird]
    Attachments
    ggraham
    Posts:

    --
    02 May 2006 10:15 AM
    [Comments] [Matthew J. Smith]
    Attachments
    Dan Slayton
    Posts:

    --
    11 May 2006 05:05 PM
    [Comments] [Judge Dan Slayton]

    I am in agreement that there are certain proceedings where a court reporter is not necessary. I also understand that the use of electronic recording for certain legal proceedings is permissive; court reporters can still be requested. I think that it is short-sighted, though, in making such a sweeping change on how we keep the record, to pursue this rule change without more data on how the proposed rule change is functioning in a controlled setting. In my opinion, more time is needed to ascertain how these changes will affect the most important parties to this change: the lititgants themselves.

    I have used electronic recording (FTR Gold) in hundreds of cases both criminal and civil. While it functioned correctly for most of the proceedings, it also failed. The issues of failure which I believe are significant for consideration of this rule change are: 1) the inability of the clerk to determine that the recording was failing or had failed during trial, and 2) the failure or inability of judges to ensure litigants or their attorneys were at or near the microphone in order to pick up certain testimony.

    These failures would be catastophic for certain civil proceedings such as complex civil litigation, wrongful death cases, and medical malpractice cases which under the proposed rule authorize waiver of a court reporter. No appeal could be taken where the record was defective due to the failure to record or where the recording functioned properly but due to either the failure of the parties speaking to be at the microphone, or the failure of a microphone to capture the sound adequately, the record was inaudible or incomprensible.

    Assume that a plaintiff to a wrongful death case had barely sufficient funds to take a case to trial and the electronic recording was insufficient or had failed completely. Assume further that either the plaintiff or defendant had a legitimate appeal issue. However, due to the failure of the record or the fact that certain portions of the record were inaudible or incomprehensible, no appeal could be taken. What would the cost be to the parties to have to re-try the case? Could the plaintiff even consider the cost of re-trial? Ultimately, what would be the cost to the integrity of our judicial system and the confidence of the citizens in a system that depended upon a nine-volt battery as opposed to taking the time to see whether these changes will truly enhance our legal proceedings?

    I propose that a five-year study of certain selected courts be conducted to establish a baseline of data for the efficacy of such a change. I fail to see why this rule change must be hurried into existence absent a careful study examining its effect upon the lives of those who would be significantly impacted by its presence.

    Respectfully,

    Judge Dan Slayton
    Division Five
    Coconino County Superior Court
    dsfoto
    Posts:

    --
    12 May 2006 10:20 AM
    [Comment] [David Savage]

    I am not a lawyer but I have noticed in several proceedings where my step father has blatently lied or his attorney has twisted the truth to fit the agenda. I would sure like to be able to use their words and lack of candor to crucify them All I want is justice for my ailing mother as I am her only representative and she got nothing in support or property because the others side is allowed to lie.
    Mr. David Savage
    Master of Arts Russian
    Tucson Arizona
    ecrowley
    Posts:

    --
    12 May 2006 12:07 PM
    [Comments] [W. Bert Lundy]
    Attachments
    ecrowley
    Posts:

    --
    12 May 2006 12:12 PM
    [Comment] [Jim L. Johnston, Esq.]
    Attachments
    ecrowley
    Posts:

    --
    12 May 2006 12:17 PM
    [Comments] [Jeffrey J. Hernandez]
    Attachments
    ecrowley
    Posts:

    --
    12 May 2006 12:20 PM
    [Comments] [Jodie Guhr]
    Attachments
    ecrowley
    Posts:

    --
    12 May 2006 05:16 PM
    [Comments] [Peter B. Keller, Esq.] [Filed April 27, 2006]
    Attachments
    ecrowley
    Posts:

    --
    12 May 2006 05:20 PM
    [Comments] [Stephen H. Lesher, Esq.] [Filed May 9, 2006]
    Attachments
    angelamiller
    Posts:

    --
    13 May 2006 01:33 PM
    Angela F. Miller, RPR, CR (AZ50127)
    Miller Certified Reporting, LLC
    PO Box 513
    Litchfield Park, AZ 85340
    623-975-7472 – Phone
    623-975-7462 – fax
    angela@millercertifiedreporting.com
    Attachments
    pconnolly2@cox.net
    Posts:

    --
    14 May 2006 03:16 PM
    [Comments] [Patricia A. Connolly]

    Dear Honorable Justices:

    I would appreciate your time and consideration on the decision of Court Reporters' presence in all Civil, Juvenile and Criminal Evidentiary Proceedings.

    Yes, we as Court Reporters have a personal and financial interest in this decision; however, I have always believed we provide a valuable service to the Court.

    Every day, I strive to write and when requested, produce an accurate record and take tremendous pride in my job. I would hope our presence and the human element has been recognized as being valuable.

    Electronic recordings transcribed by a pool of people who were not present at the hearing and could possibly be inexperienced in transcribing court proceedings cannot be compared to Court Reporters.

    Also, considering the incident rate of forgetting to turn on the equipment, place a disk, CD or tape in the equipment and equipment failure, electronic recordings should not be compared to Court Reporters.

    Have you ever experienced an event of forgetfulness when the Court Reporter inconspicuously reminded you? An electronic recording is incapable of recognizing judicial economy. Please consider this when making your decision.

    Thank you for your time and attention.

    Sincerely,

    Patricia A. Connolly
    Certified Reporter - Certificate Number 50675
    17319 E. Via Del Oro
    Fountain Hills, AZ 85268
    pconnolly2@cox.net
    (480) 235-3534
    TGBaker
    Posts:

    --
    16 May 2006 06:16 PM
    Thaddeus G. Baker, Jr.
    12 East Dale Ave.
    PO Box C
    Flagstaff, AZ 86002
    Phone: (928)774-5208
    Fax: (928)774-0548
    E-Mail: attytgb@aol.com


    I would like to add my voice in opposition to the elimination of the verbatim record. I practice in bankruptcy court and in administrative appellate proceeding where audio recordings are used. To use an audio recording in a proceeding one has to retain a transcriptionist. The quality of the end product is often insufficient as many words are missing or there are areas of the tape that are inaudiable due to backround noise. Court reporters are more accurate because they are present when the testimoney is given and it is more efficient to just order the transcript. Adding another layer to obtain a written transcript of lesser qualifty is counterproductive. In addition. one can read a transcript must faster than one can listen to a transcript. The practice of law is difficult enough, without making it more difficult to preserve an accurate record of the testimoney or argument. Thaddeus G. Baker Jr. Attorney at Law
    tvos
    Posts:

    --
    17 May 2006 12:33 PM
    Terri L. Vos, RPR
    Certified Reporter 50115
    4919 E. Scarlett St.
    Tucson, AZ 85711
    ghiagirltlv@juno.com
    (520) 319-1678

    Dear Honorable Justices,

    It has been proven time and again and in several states throughout the country where court reporters have been replaced with ER that the judicial process suffers. After going through the expense of installing ER and modifying courtrooms to accommodate and enhance the effectiveness of the equipment many courts have subsequently abandoned the use of this equipment or only use it when absolutely necessary. Why would Arizona expect that our implementation of such equipment would be more successful?
    Court reporters are professionals working in the actual setting of the proceedings, not a transcriber who is far removed from the setting. Court reporters understand the importance of the proceedings, that their end product will affect people's lives and that that person deserves the best possible transcript they can receive. Transcribers are only capable of transcribing what is understandable on the recording. They cannot ask for clarification. In this regard obviously the transcript is going to suffer. Also, the transcribers are generally entry-level, unskilled typists who have no experience with technical subjects and terminology.
    Please consider these issues when deciding the issue of allowing ER in any civil, criminal, juvenile, domestic, and compency matters.
    I submit my comments in support of maintaining the professional court reporter as the sole means of keeping the record in Arizona.

    Sincerely,

    Terri L. Vos, RPR
    Certified Reporter 50115
    4919 E. Scarlett St.
    Tucson, AZ 85711
    ghiagirltlv@juno.com
    (520) 319-1678

    ecrowley
    Posts:

    --
    17 May 2006 06:21 PM
    [Comment] [Maricopa County Board of Supervisors, Don Stapley, Chairman]
    Attachments
    tmaguilar
    Posts:

    --
    18 May 2006 10:42 AM
    Theresa Aguilar
    800 W. Main Street
    Safford, Arizona 85546
    (928)428-3310
    (928)428-1032 (fax)
    taguilar@graham.az.gov
    Attachments
    Topic is locked
    Page 1 of 41234 > >>