Bill to regulate and certify audio‑video legal recorders sparks dispute between court reporters and deposition services

The Assembly Commerce and Labor Committee heard Senate Bill 191, a complex measure intended to reconcile long‑running disputes between licensed court reporters and providers who make audiovisual records of depositions and other proceedings.

Sponsor Senator Skip Daley said the bill’s central goal is to require licensing for audiovisual recorders and to create three tiers of credentialing: a basic certification (record only, when a licensed court reporter is present), an advanced certification (ability to record, transcribe, and certify a written transcript without a court reporter present), and a provisional certification to preserve the current status quo while regulations are developed. "SB-191 will provide for and require audiovideo recorders to be licensed in Nevada," Daley said during his presentation.

Proponents, including the Nevada Court Reporters Association and the Nevada Certified Court Reporters Board chair, said licensure and stronger language against unlicensed practice are needed to protect the integrity of the official record, to give litigants recourse when transcript quality or data handling is disputed, and to modernize the statute. The court reporters stressed that a certified transcript traditionally rests on a reporter who was physically present and took contemporaneous shorthand or stenographic notes.

Opponents — including national deposition-service firms and business groups — opposed parts of the bill, particularly section 4 governing third‑party requests for transcripts or recordings. Business witnesses and the Nevada Justice Association argued the proposed third‑party notice and limited-release procedures would increase litigation costs and hamper routine discovery practices; some firms said they were near a neutral position but sought additional work on the third‑party-release language.

The sponsor emphasized transitory provisions that allow provisional practice until the board adopts regulations and said municipal, justice and district courts’ existing courtroom audiovisual procedures would be preserved. Several stakeholders asked for further negotiation; Senator Daley said he had negotiated extensively and was willing to continue discussions but argued failure to enact the bill would leave no statutory framework for third‑party requests or enforcement against unlicensed practice.

Ending: The committee took testimony from multiple affected parties and did not record a vote; the sponsor and stakeholders will continue negotiations on third‑party release rules and regulatory detail for advanced certification.