PDA

View Full Version : Some Legal Questions - California Rules of Court & LASCR


Theseus
05-06-2010, 4:27 PM
Alright, so I now have a new quote for the cost of the transcripts for my trial, but I have twice now filed notice of indigence and requested transcripts be provided at public expense and twice been ignored on the issue by the courts.

I have been trying to make sense of the Rules of Court that dictate how these issues are handled and there seems to be a major flaw. . . The LASCR (LA County Superior Court Rules) says that they will be governed by Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.786, but that particular rule has been repealed as of Jan 1, 2009. . . . so what does that mean?

It is my understanding that the court doesn't commonly simply ignore filings, so where am I to go? I could simply pay the fee, but if there is a reasonable means to avoid it costing me or us at this point it seems prudent to try and take it. . . any advice or assistance in this particular issue would be appreciated.

JustLegalInformation
05-06-2010, 4:32 PM
You need to contact the actual Court Reporter who is responsible for the transcripts. Ask her for the Judicial Council Form --- see where that goes. The reporter is the best person to ask for assistance.

Theseus
05-06-2010, 4:34 PM
Judicial Council form MC-210? Already completed and filed with the court twice! That is the issue. . . court is ignoring the filings. . . no response what soever in this regard.

As for contacting the reporter. . . unfortunately there are about 5 of them. But I guess if one would do, then that might be the winner.

GuyW
05-06-2010, 11:01 PM
Its my understanding that the transcript is the personal property of the court reporter....dunno that the court can just take their property....
.

Scarecrow Repair
05-07-2010, 7:25 AM
Its my understanding that the transcript is the personal property of the court reporter....dunno that the court can just take their property....
.

Many years ago, I worked at a company (BaronData) which provided computers for court reporters. Our customers covered the IBM anti-trust trial for IBM with two hour turnaround on transcripts and got a huge payout for huge amounts of rush work, and we were told many times that the reporters own the transcript -- lawyers who want extra copies are supposed to pay the reporter, not just run them thru the Xerox machine. Those IBM lawyers were paying a fortune for the extra rush copies. I reckon lawyers probably do engage in small time copying for personal use, but I doubt they want to piss off the reporters any more than they want to piss off the judge.

BKinzey
05-07-2010, 9:11 AM
Several years ago I was told by a court reporter that the bottom had dropped out on the business. It was not longer required to go through the court reporter for copies of the transcript.

Your lawyer has a transcript? Can't they furnish you with a copy? Maybe they want too much $$$ to provide you with one?

macadamizer
05-07-2010, 12:45 PM
The revised version of Rule 8.786 is Rule 8.851.

Theseus
05-07-2010, 3:04 PM
Several years ago I was told by a court reporter that the bottom had dropped out on the business. It was not longer required to go through the court reporter for copies of the transcript.

Your lawyer has a transcript? Can't they furnish you with a copy? Maybe they want too much $$$ to provide you with one?

Apparently the format of transcripts is not the same requirement for trail as it is for appeal, so any transcripts we got during the trial are not able to be used for the appeal.

Anyway, I figured it out. . . someone just forgot what their job was in this case. . . It is my duty to politely remind them and move on. The good news is that these delays make it more and more likely that McDonald will be handed down before I need to prepare my briefs!

Wherryj
05-07-2010, 4:57 PM
Judicial Council form MC-210? Already completed and filed with the court twice! That is the issue. . . court is ignoring the filings. . . no response what soever in this regard.

As for contacting the reporter. . . unfortunately there are about 5 of them. But I guess if one would do, then that might be the winner.

I am assuming that the LA court has a website like the Alameda county court site? You should be able to see all of the filings for your case and determine if it actually was entered-and possibly their decision in case they are just not good at letting you know the court's decision.

I know this because I am involved with a patient advocacy group suing our local hospital's foundation for restricting patient's choice of physician. The Alameda county court site has literally every filing and any court desicions online. It is a good way to see if it somehow got lost in the system.

I'm also assuming that you had it filed by a certified messanger with a declaration?

snobord99
05-07-2010, 6:09 PM
The revised version of Rule 8.786 is Rule 8.851.

Beat me to it...by several hours ;)

Theseus
05-07-2010, 7:51 PM
I am assuming that the LA court has a website like the Alameda county court site? You should be able to see all of the filings for your case and determine if it actually was entered-and possibly their decision in case they are just not good at letting you know the court's decision.

I know this because I am involved with a patient advocacy group suing our local hospital's foundation for restricting patient's choice of physician. The Alameda county court site has literally every filing and any court desicions online. It is a good way to see if it somehow got lost in the system.

I'm also assuming that you had it filed by a certified messanger with a declaration?

The MC-210 is a form that is supportive evidence for the CR-133 and CR-134, and perhaps others.

The appellate court answers the CR-133 (Court appointed counsel) and the trial court is responsible for the CR-134 (Record at public expense). The appellate did it's job, the problem is with the trial court clerk. They Are working with the belief that since the appellate denied my court appointed counsel that they also answered the question about the transcripts.

California Rules of Court, Rule 8.866(a)(2)(D)(ii) affirms that it is in fact the job of the trial court to make a ruling on indigence.

This is what our understanding is. Unfortunately I don't have an experience appellate lawyer at this time so I can only go on the understanding I can gain from the Rules of Court.

Also, the clerk is around the corner from me. . . only minutes away. . . I could almost walk there faster than driving and parking. No need to use a messenger. Proof of Service and filing with the clerk. Takes only a few minutes.