BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
Senator Noreen Evans, Chair
2013-2014 Regular Session
AB 648 (Jones-Sawyer)
As Amended April 29, 2013
Hearing Date: June 18, 2013
Fiscal: No
Urgency: No
RD
SUBJECT
Court Reporters
DESCRIPTION
This bill would specify that for each proceeding lasting one
hour or less, the existing $30 fee for the services of an
official court reporter shall be charged only to the party (or
parties) that filed the paper that resulted in the proceeding
being scheduled. The party paying the fee would be required to
deposit the fee with the court clerk as specified by the court,
but no later than the conclusion of each day's court session,
and be entitled to a refund to the remitting party if no court
services were provided at the scheduled proceeding.
This bill would provide that the fee can be charged only once
per case for all proceedings conducted within the same hour, if
the total time taken by those proceedings is one hour or less.
If the total time is more than one hour, the party or parties
would be required to pay the amount required under existing law
for proceedings lasting more than one hour.
This bill would also require waiver of the $30 court reporter
fee for any person granted a fee waiver pursuant to existing
law, as specified.
BACKGROUND
California law requires that an official reporter or official
reporter pro tempore of the superior court take down in
shorthand all testimony, objections made, rulings of the court,
exceptions taken, arraignments, pleas, sentences, arguments of
(more)
AB 648 (Jones-Sawyer)
Page 2 of ?
the attorneys to the jury, and statements and remarks made and
oral instructions given by the judge or other judicial officer,
in specified cases. These cases include, among others, civil
cases that are ordered by the court or requested by a party.
(Code Civ. Proc. Sec. 269.)
Separately, California law, with the enactment of AB 233
(Escutia and Pringle, Ch. 850, Stats. 1997), consolidated all
court funding at the state level, giving the Legislature
authority to make appropriations and the Judicial Council
responsibility to allocate funds to state courts. In doing so,
it required that all court reporters fees collected by the trial
courts be deposited into the Trial Court Trust Fund (TCTF),
where nearly all court-collected fees are now deposited. The
court reporter fees are then returned to the trial courts as
part of their annual allocation and are distributed on a pro
rata basis, as opposed to on the basis of the dollars collected.
More specifically, the Government Code requires that certain
fees be charged and be used to pay for the cost for services of
an official court reporter in civil proceedings. In proceedings
lasting more than one hour, a fee equal to the actual cost of
providing that service must be charged per one-half day of
services to the parties, on a pro rata basis, for the court
reporter services on the first and each succeeding judicial day
those services are provided. All parties must deposit their pro
rata shares of these fees with the court clerk as specified by
the court, but not later than the conclusion of each day's court
session. (Gov. Code Sec. 68086(a)(2).)
Last year, a budget trailer bill added that for each proceeding
lasting less than one hour, a fee of $30 dollars must be charged
for the reasonable cost of the services of official court
reporters in civil proceedings, pursuant to that existing law.
(SB 1021 (Committee on Budget and Fiscal Review, Ch. 41, Stats.
2012). This bill seeks to provide specificity regarding the
payment of that fee.
CHANGES TO EXISTING LAW
1. Existing law , in relevant part, requires that an official
reporter or official reporter pro tempore of the superior
court take down in shorthand all testimony, objections made,
rulings of the court, exceptions taken, arraignments, pleas,
sentences, arguments of the attorneys to the jury, and
AB 648 (Jones-Sawyer)
Page 3 of ?
statements and remarks made and oral instructions given by the
judge or other judicial officer, in certain cases, including,
among others, in a civil case, on the order of the court or at
the request of a party. (Code Civ. Proc. Sec. 269.)
Existing law establishes the Trial Court Trust Fund (TCTF).
(Gov. Code Sec. 68085.)
Existing law requires that, among other fees, the fees
collected by the trial courts for official court reporters be
deposited in a bank account established by the Administrative
Office of the Courts (AOC). The AOC must distribute those
deposits as provided, with the remainder going to the TCTF.
(Gov. Code Sec. 68085.1.)
Existing law requires that for each civil proceeding lasting
more than one hour, a fee equal to one-half day of services be
charged to the parties, on a pro rata basis, and that the fees
collected be used only to pay the cost for services of an
official court reporter, as specified. (Gov. Code Sec.
68086(a)(1)(B).)
Existing law requires that for that each civil proceeding
lasting less than one hour, a fee of $30 be charged for the
reasonable cost of services of an official court reporter, as
specified(Gov. Code Sec. 68086(a)(1)(A).)
This bill would, instead, require that for each proceeding
lasting one hour or less, a $30 fee be charged for the
reasonable cost of the services of official court reporters in
civil proceedings, pursuant to Section 269 of the Code of
Civil Procedure, as follows:
the fee must be charged only to the party, or parties if
filing jointly, that filed the paper that resulted in the
proceeding being scheduled;
all parties paying the fee must deposit the fee with the
court clerk as specified by the court, but not later than
the conclusion of each day's court session;
the fee must be charged once per case for all proceedings
conducted within the same hour if the total time taken by
those proceedings is one hour or less;
if the total time taken exceeds one hour, the fee must be
charged and collected pursuant to the provision governing
fees for court reporters in proceedings lasting more than
one hour, as outlined above;
the fee must be deposited into the TCTF and distributed
back to the courts in which the fees were collected on a
AB 648 (Jones-Sawyer)
Page 4 of ?
dollar-for-dollar basis; and
the fee must be refunded to the remitting party or parties
if no court reporting services were provided at the
scheduled proceeding.
This bill would recast several related provisions and revise
cross-references to those provisions accordingly.
2. Existing law authorizes the granting of a court fee waiver
to a litigant who cannot afford to pay the fee, as specified.
(Gov. Code Sec. 68631.)
This bill would require this fee be waived for a person who
has been granted a fee waiver pursuant to existing law, above.
COMMENT
1. Stated need for the bill
According to the author:
The 2012 public safety budget trailer bill [SB 1021 (Committee
on Budget and Fiscal Review, Ch. 41, Stats. 2012)] created a
new $30 fee to be assessed against litigants for court
reporter services in civil proceedings lasting less than one
hour. The statute did not provide clear guidance, however, on
how to implement this fee. [The J]udicial Council's Policy
Coordination and Liaison Committee (PCLC) and the Joint
Legislation Working Group of the Trial Court Presiding Judges
and Court Executives Advisory Committees (JLWG) therefore
recommend addressing the lack of specificity and resulting
confusion to better enable courts to collect revenue from this
new source. This proposal will streamline procedures and
create sufficient flexibility and guidance for the courts and
for litigants on how this new fee will be assessed.
AB 648 will:
Clarify that the fee is for proceedings lasting one hour or
less;
Clarify that the moving party is responsible for the fee;
Clarify that a single $30 fee shall be charged per case per
day for all actions as long as the proceeding lasts less
than an hour;
Authorize the court to collect the fee at the time the
party files the papers that result in the scheduled hearing
AB 648 (Jones-Sawyer)
Page 5 of ?
or as otherwise arranged by the court;
Specify that the fee is refundable only if the court fails
to provide a court reporter at the scheduled hearing;
Clarify that the funds may only be used for court
reporters; and
Provides that the funds shall be deposited in the Trial
Court Trust Fund and then shall be returned to the court in
which the funds were collected on a dollar for dollar
basis.
2. This bill could be unintentionally burdensome for both
parties and the courts
Existing law requires a $30 fee for any civil proceeding lasting
less than one hour for the reasonable cost of the services of an
official court reporter in the proceeding. This bill would
require that the fee be charged only to the party (or parties,
if filing jointly) that files the paper resulting in the
scheduling of the proceeding. The bill would require that the
party (or parties) paying the fee deposit the fee with the court
clerk as specified by the court, but no later than the
conclusion of each day's court session. Those fees would be
deposited into the Trial Court Trust Fund (TCTF) and distributed
back to the courts in which the fees were collected, on a dollar
for dollar basis. If no court reporting services were provided
at the scheduled proceeding, the party or parties would be
entitled to a refund.
Among other things, this bill would also require that the fee be
charged once per case for all proceedings conducted within the
same hour if the total time taken by those proceedings is one
hour or less. If the total time is more than one hour, the
party or parties would be required to pay the amount required
pursuant to an existing provision governing proceedings lasting
more than one hour.
The author asserts that "[i]n order to consistently and
effectively implement the trailer bill legislation creating this
new $30 court reporter fee [for civil proceedings lasting less
than an hour], the legislation must be clarified. AB 648 amends
the statute to make implementation of the $30[ ] court reporter
fee clear and precise without changing the intent behind its
initial creation." While the author appears to have recently
amended the bill to address some issues raised by the Consumer
Attorneys of California (CAOC), it appears that some of those
concerns still remain. The CAOC writes that:
AB 648 (Jones-Sawyer)
Page 6 of ?
While this legislation is aimed to clean up budget trailer
bill language from last year, it goes further than the intent
of that language. [. . .] (1) It requires the party to pay a
$30 fee, even when the party does not require or request a
court reporter. In contrast, the budget trailer bill language
said $30 would be charged for the "reasonable costs of an
official reporter." (2) It requires the party to deposit
this fee even when there is no realistic expectation that a
court reporter will be available, and would then apparently
require the party to request a refund after the fact. This is
an unreasonable and unfair burden on the parties to the
litigation."
Staff also notes that, as currently drafted, by requiring
parties to make a payment and then seek a refund when they know
that a reporter will not be needed or when calendar changes are
made after the party has already made the required deposit, the
foreseeable burden of making an unnecessary deposit and then
obtaining a refund is not limited to the parties who did not
need those services. Arguably, this bill would also impose
additional administrative costs on the courts to process
payments and refunds that could have been otherwise avoided.
Additionally, in conjunction with the language allowing that $30
be charged as specified by the court, "but not later than the
conclusion of each day's court session," this bill could result
in the confusing situation where a party would be required to
deposit the fee by the end of that day's session, even it is
clear they will not be receiving the services of a court
reporter. In that circumstance, the party could then request a
refund, but, it is also unclear how long it would take for a
party to receive their refund given that the bill requires the
fee to be placed in the TCTF. Furthermore, if the fees are to
be deposited into the TCTF and distributed back to the courts in
which the fees were collected on a dollar-for-dollar basis, the
processing of refunds could significantly complicate the process
or otherwise result in inaccurate distributions.
In support of the need to charge the $30 fee up-front at the
time of filing, the Judicial Council asserts that:
Logistically, and to ensure that the money is actually
collected, courts must have the option of collecting the money
at the time of filing. The individuals are present and already
paying a filing fee at this time. This fee is for civil
AB 648 (Jones-Sawyer)
Page 7 of ?
proceedings lasting one hour or less. Often, we are talking
about civil law and motion calendars, OSC calendars, etc[.],
where there are as many as 50 proceedings or more on the
morning or afternoon calendar. Collecting the fee in the
courtroom would interfere with the ability of the court to
conduct the hearings on these matters, creating delay. If it
is not collected in the courtroom, the party will have to
voluntarily go to the clerk's office to pay the fee, or be
invoiced. The end result - the fee often will not be paid, and
the courts do not have the additional resources to collect
these fees. Collecting the fee in the courtroom or at the
clerk's window creates an administrative burden and will
result in considerably lower collections. It cannot be
compared to the fees for proceedings lasting more than one
hour, because the volume is vastly different. By allowing the
trial courts to continue to collect this fee at the filing
window as parties are paying their filing fees, the trial
court is guaranteed to receive the fee without additional time
and labor costs.
Staff notes that the main purpose of charging the $30 fee
up-front appears to be to ensure collection, and as a result,
the fee would be collected before any services are rendered. In
this way, the court reporter fee can be distinguished from
filing fees because at the time a party pays their filing fee,
the paperwork is actually filed. As noted by CAOC's letter, the
intent of the trailer bill in adding this $30 fee was to ensure
an appropriate amount is charged to parties for the reasonable
cost of the services of a court reporter in their proceeding-not
to create a deposit for court reporters services more generally,
regardless of whether or not they will be provided in a
particular proceeding.
The following amendments would address such issues by:
ensuring that the $30 is charged only where the court
reporting services of an official court reporter are going to
be provided by the court pursuant to existing law (requiring
court reporting services in civil proceedings upon request of
a party or on order of the court);
ensuring that unless the court reporter is provided pursuant
to court order, the party requesting the court reporter pay
the fee;
ensuring that any refunds are issued as soon as practicable;
and
making other technical or clarifying amendments.
AB 648 (Jones-Sawyer)
Page 8 of ?
Suggested amendments:
On page 2, line 5, after "proceeding" insert "anticipated to
last"
On page 2, line 7, after "reasonable cost of the" insert
"court reporting"
On page 2, line 7, strike "official court reporters in civil
proceedings" and insert "an official court reporter that is
provided by the court"
On page 2, line 23, strike "only"
On page 2, line 25, after the period add "If no fee is
charged, and another party subsequently requests a court
reporter, that party shall be charged the fee if the court
determines a reporter will be provided."
On page 3, line 10, strike "fees" and insert "fee"
On page 3, line 12, strike "in" and insert "from"
On page 3, line 12, strike "fees were" and insert "fee was"
On page 3, line 13, after ""refunded" insert "as soon as
practicable"
On page3, line 14, strike "at the scheduled" and insert period
On page 3, strike line 15 in its entirety
3. Chaptering-out issues
Staff notes that a budget trailer bill, AB 80 (Assembly
Committee on Budget, 2013) also amends Government Code Section
68086. Language should be added to this bill before returning
to the Assembly to avoid causing chaptering-out issues.
Support : California Court Reporters Association; San Bernardino
Public Employees Association; San Luis Obispo County Employees
Association
Opposition : None Known
HISTORY
AB 648 (Jones-Sawyer)
Page 9 of ?
Source : Judicial Council
Related Pending Legislation : AB 80 (Assembly Committee on
Budget, 2013) would, among other things, amend the existing
provision requiring a $30 fee to be charged for the reasonable
cost of court reporter services in civil proceedings lasting
less than one hour, to specify that the proceeds of the fee
shall be distributed to the court in which the fee was
collected.
Prior Legislation : SB 1021 (Committee on Budget and Fiscal
Review, Ch. 41, Stats. 2012) See Background.
Prior Vote :
Assembly Floor (Ayes 49, Noes 24)
Assembly Judiciary Committee (Ayes 8, Noes 1)
**************