Court Transcript Rules Shift in Los Angeles County – What Litigants Need to Know

Posted bystenoimperiumPosted inCourt Reporting, Legal ServicesTags:, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

On January 21, 2026, the Los Angeles County Superior Court issued a clarification that refines how parties involved in unlimited civil appeals pay for and obtain court reporter transcripts — a critical part of the appellate process. The announcement, rooted in provisions of the California Rules of Court, directly affects how both appellants and respondents handle deposits and optional transcript copies when a reporter’s record of oral proceedings is used on appeal.

At the heart of the changes is the court’s effort to streamline and clearly define responsibilities in paying for transcripts while maintaining fairness in how parties access the record on appeal. Appeals in unlimited civil cases often hinge on the record of what occurred in the trial court. Court reporters — whether official or freelance — prepare transcripts that become part of that record. Until now, confusion had existed about how respondents could secure their own copies of transcripts, especially when not seeking to expand the record itself.

Appellants: Designations and Deposits Still Center Stage

Under the existing California Rules of Court, appellants who choose to use a reporter’s transcript as the basis for the oral proceedings portion of the appellate record must file a notice of designation and pay an estimated cost deposit to the clerk at the time of filing. These deposits are meant to cover the reporter’s fees for preparing the transcript and are calculated based on whether the proceedings have been previously transcribed or not.

For proceedings that have not been previously transcribed, the rules outline a higher deposit amount — reflecting the cost of the initial preparation. For those portions already transcribed, a reduced rate applies. In both instances, detailed guidelines are found in Rule 8.130 of the state’s appellate procedure.

This framework ensures the appellant shoulders the financial responsibility for creating the transcript that forms the centerpiece of the appeal record. However, until recently, it was less clear how respondents who wished only a copy of that transcript — without designating additional proceedings — should proceed.

Respondents: Clarifying Deposit Duties and Optional Copies

Respondents, whose role in the appeal might be defensive, also have rights to the appellate record. They may designate additional proceedings for inclusion, thereby seeking a broader transcript that covers parts of the trial not initially requested by the appellant. In those cases, respondents must also make deposits or use alternative options outlined in the rules to cover the reporter’s cost of transcribing those additional portions. The deposit must suffice to produce an original transcript for the reviewing court and a copy for the appellant.

The key clarification announced by the Los Angeles County Superior Court concerns respondents who want a copy of the transcript but do not want to designate additional proceedings. In such situations, the deposit respondents traditionally made to expand the reporter’s transcript did not — by itself — cover the cost of providing a separate copy to the respondent. The recent guidance makes it clear that respondents can now place an optional deposit for transcript copies at the same rates charged when parties designate proceedings that have already been transcribed.

This means that for a proceeding that has already been transcribed, respondents can deposit:

  • $80 per proceeding that did not exceed three hours, or
  • $160 per proceeding that exceeded three hours.
    This optional deposit allows the court to order and deliver a complete copy of the reporter’s transcript on appeal to the respondent as well as the appellant.

Alternatives and Direct Reporter Contact

Importantly, this optional deposit is not mandatory. Respondents who choose not to make this deposit but still wish to obtain copies of transcripts — whether selective dates or particular segments — are advised to work directly with the court reporter. Reporters often provide transcripts on request, independent of the court’s ordering process. This route could offer flexibility for respondents who only need limited portions of the record.

This clarification responds to longstanding concerns among appellate practitioners about the accessibility and cost responsibilities of obtaining transcripts. Providing a defined, optional deposit structure helps level expectations and allows litigants to make informed choices when navigating the appeals process.

Broader Context: Modernizing Court Record Access

The Los Angeles County Superior Court’s action fits within a broader trend toward making appellate records more accessible and predictable. In recent years, the court has expanded electronic services and delivery of court records, including the record on appeal. For example, as part of a 2025 initiative, the court began delivering clerk’s and reporter’s transcripts electronically in many civil appeals.

Such initiatives underscore a judiciary striving to balance procedural rigor with the practical needs of attorneys and litigants. Clear rules for deposits and transcripts — including optional copies for respondents — are part of that modernization effort, especially in the nation’s largest trial court system serving nearly 10 million residents across dozens of courthouses.

What Lawyers and Litigants Should Do Now

For attorneys and litigants navigating unlimited civil appeals in Los Angeles County:

  • Understand the deposit requirements for both appellants and respondents as defined in the California Rules of Court.
  • Consider the optional deposit if a respondent wants a complete copy of the reporter’s transcript ordered by the court.
  • Consult directly with the court reporter for customized transcript needs if the optional deposit path is not chosen.
  • Stay informed about electronic delivery options through the court’s website and clerk’s office.

As appellate procedure continues to evolve, this clarification brings a level of transparency that can help reduce disputes and improve efficiency in how the record on appeal is produced and shared.

Disclaimer

This article is for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Court rules, policies, and procedures may change, and their application can vary based on case-specific facts. Parties and practitioners should consult the California Rules of Court, local court notices, and qualified legal counsel for guidance on transcript designations, deposits, and appellate requirements.

Published by stenoimperium

We exist to facilitate the fortifying of the Stenography profession and ensure its survival for the next hundred years! As court reporters, we've handed the relationship role with our customers, or attorneys, over to the agencies and their sales reps.  This has done a lot of damage to our industry.  It has taken away our ability to have those relationships, the ability to be humanized and valued.  We've become a replaceable commodity. Merely saying we are the “Gold Standard” tells them that we’re the best, but there are alternatives.  Who we are though, is much, much more powerful than that!  We are the Responsible Charge.  “Responsible Charge” means responsibility for the direction, control, supervision, and possession of stenographic & transcription work, as the case may be, to assure that the work product has been critically examined and evaluated for compliance with appropriate professional standards by a licensee in the profession, and by sealing and signing the documents, the professional stenographer accepts responsibility for the stenographic or transcription work, respectively, represented by the documents and that applicable stenographic and professional standards have been met.  This designation exists in other professions, such as engineering, land surveying, public water works, landscape architects, land surveyors, fire preventionists, geologists, architects, and more.  In the case of professional engineers, the engineering association adopted a Responsible Charge position statement that says, “A professional engineer is only considered to be in responsible charge of an engineering work if the professional engineer makes independent professional decisions regarding the engineering work without requiring instruction or approval from another authority and maintains control over those decisions by the professional engineer’s physical presence at the location where the engineering work is performed or by electronic communication with the individual executing the engineering work.” If we were to adopt a Responsible Charge position statement for our industry, we could start with a draft that looks something like this: "A professional court reporter, or stenographer, is only considered to be in responsible charge of court reporting work if the professional court reporter makes independent professional decisions regarding the court reporting work without requiring instruction or approval from another authority and maintains control over those decisions by the professional court reporter’s physical presence at the location where the court reporting work is performed or by electronic communication with the individual executing the court reporting work.” Shared purpose The cornerstone of a strategic narrative is a shared purpose. This shared purpose is the outcome that you and your customer are working toward together. It’s more than a value proposition of what you deliver to them. Or a mission of what you do for the world. It’s the journey that you are on with them. By having a shared purpose, the relationship shifts from consumer to co-creator. In court reporting, our mission is “to bring justice to every litigant in the U.S.”  That purpose is shared by all involved in the litigation process – judges, attorneys, everyone.  Who we are is the Responsible Charge.  How we do that is by Protecting the Record.

Leave a comment