Reporting an Injustice? Court Reporters File Class Action Suit Against NCRA.
Certified court reporters, also known as stenographers, are a constant within courtrooms. They perform an invaluable service by making sure every word of a trial is documented. Soon, though, a few of their brethren will find themselves in a slightly different location — as plaintiffs.
A class action lawsuit was filed in the Newark Division of District Court of New Jersey on January 3rd, 2025 against the National Court Reporters Association (NCRA). Representative plaintiffs Kelly Palazzi and Cindy Jenkins allege that the Association is guilty of an unlawful tying arraignment in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act.
Are their claims of anticompetitive conduct and antitrust violations valid? Let's take a look at the details of the case.
The Only Game in Town
The plaintiffs seek damages and injunctive relief under the Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914. They claim the NCRA verges on being a monopoly in the fields of certified court reporting (CCR), registered skilled reporters (RSR), and captioners, collectively known as the Stenographic Membership Market.
This claim is based on NCRA's share of the stenographic market. At the time of the filing, 39 states and 3 U.S. territories (Guam, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands) require certification or licensing for stenographers. Of these 42 jurisdictions, only California and Texas have their own certification exams through their respective Supreme Courts.
The other 95% accept the NCRA exam for certification. This makes getting certification from the NRCA almost a necessity for stenographers. Some states have the NCRA exam's viability as part of their code. The plaintiffs charge that this market dominance gives the NCRA the ability to make unreasonable financial demands on stenographers.
You'll Need This ... And This ... Oh, and This As Well ...
In 12 of the 37 states requiring outside certification, only results from the NCRA exam are accepted. There's no requirement to be a member of NCRA to take the exam. However, not joining the NCRA within 30 days after passing the respective certification exam effectively voids the certification.
This is the crux of the plaintiffs' claim. They claim that a requirement to purchase a $300 annual membership to keep your exam certification is an unlawful tying arrangement. The filing charges that membership offers no real value and is an unnecessary expense that exists solely as a revenue source for NCRA. It also cites the NCRA's reinstatement procedures as unfair.
The annual membership fee is significantly higher than those of other stenographer organizations. Given the NCRA's market share, not being a member impairs a stenographer's opportunity to find employment. In 2022, the NCRA had assets of around $6 million. Their two closest competitors had combined assets of $350,000.
The lawsuit also accuses the NCRA of forcing additional expenses on members through unnecessary additional requirements. Members are required to complete three continuing education units (CEU) every three years at a cost of about $550 per CEU. The suit claims that this, on top of fees for registration, examinations, and certifications, makes the annual membership fee onerous and extraneous.
The lawyers in our audience may sympathize.
Read That Back To Me, Please
Given that 60% of employed stenographers are members of the NCRA, any ruling is likely to shake up the court reporting world. Smaller organizations such as the National Verbatim Reporters Association (NVRA) and the Certified Court Reporter's Association of New Jersey (CCRA-NJ) will watch with interest as new policies may be shaped.
Related Resources
- ABA Votes To Keep Admission Tests Requirement (FindLaw's Practice of Law)
- California Sets the Bar Even Higher (FindLaw's Practice of Law)
- Lawyer Suspended for Lying About Taking Two CLE Courses Simultaneously (FindLaw's Practice of Law)
