You’ve probably heard of the most traditional way for a lawyer to change the law: lawyers often work as lobbyists who meet with legislators to try to convince them to pass a new law (or amend an old one). There’s another way, though, that I’ve run across twice in the last few years: to become such a thorn in the side of an opposing party, who also happens to be a member of a large and powerful organization, that the organization decides “never again!” and has their own lobbyists convince the legislature to “close that loophole.”
I came across this phenomenon first when appealing a case involving a condominium owner’s association (similar to a home owner’s association, or HOA). After we won at the Court of Appeals, the association’s trade group lobbied to change the law to preclude the re-use of the argument I had made in our case.
The next time this firm caused a change in the law was perhaps less dramatic, but it actually has a broader reach. As part of almost every appeal, the appellant must have a transcript of the trial or hearing prepared. Transcripts must be prepared by certified court reporters, most of whom are also working as state employees in the courtroom. Traditionally, an appellate attorney will contact the court reporter who was actually in the courtroom for their proceeding and enter into a contract with that reporter for the transcript. The reporter is paid directly and personally; the State does not receive the payment.
As court reporters began increasing their rates dramatically in recent years, I began exploring hiring my own court reporters (who charge less) and having them work from the courtroom recording. This required the court reporter from the courtroom to turn over the recording of the proceeding. To my unpleasant surprise, many court reporters refused! I invoked the public records law and insisted. These court reporters could not hold hostage these recordings, which are of course state property.
The court reporters must have caught wind of this, because shortly after my public records victory, the law was changed to limit (although not entirely) the release of these recordings. No doubt the court reporters enjoy charging whatever they want without competition.
Why do I bring this up? Because transcript costs in large cases can be multiple thousands of dollars — costs that are passed on to the client. Some attorneys might accept these high costs as the “price of business.” At this law firm, we are always working to keep costs as low as possible for the client.