The National Court Reporters Association (NCRA) has filed an amicus, or “friend of the court,” brief in the Supreme Court of Texas in In re Patrick Hughey, No. 25-0463. Oral argument is scheduled for October 6, 2026. View the court’s scheduling order.
The dispute concerns a written transcript prepared using Skribe.ai from a non-stenographic deposition. A Montgomery County trial court struck the transcript and prohibited its use. The court of appeals explained that the order did not exclude the video deposition or prevent it from being played to the jury. Hughey is challenging the restrictions on using the written transcript. Read the court of appeals’ opinion.
Skribe describes its final transcripts as professionally proofread by human transcriptionists. NCRA argues that Texas law requires a certified shorthand reporter for the depositions at issue and that no statutory exception applies here. Its brief emphasizes the professional qualifications, oversight, and accountability associated with certification. NCRA also argues that changes to this framework belong with the legislature. Read NCRA’s amicus brief.
NCRA’s filing follows coordinated work with the Texas Court Reporters Association and the Texas Deposition Reporters Association. This is NCRA’s position in a pending case; the filing is not a Texas Supreme Court ruling. Read NCRA’s report in the Journal of Court Reporting.
Quinn’s Reporting did not write the brief and is not a party to the case. We are sharing this development because it raises a practical question for anyone arranging a deposition: who is responsible for the written record, and what standards govern its preparation?
The case raises concerns related to the Justice Impact Briefing from the Jeopardizing Justice Coalition that we shared in August: how testimony is captured, who prepares the transcript, and who is accountable for its accuracy and handling. Undisclosed AI notetakers raise additional questions about notice, confidentiality, and access. Read our earlier article and the briefing.
For federal depositions, Rule 30(b)(3) requires the notice to identify the recording method. Unless the court orders otherwise, it permits audio, audiovisual, or stenographic recording. It also allows parties to arrange transcription and to designate an additional recording method with prior notice to the deponent and other parties. These federal provisions are separate from the Texas-law dispute in Hughey. Read Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30.
Before using recording or transcription tools in a proceeding, clarify the proposed process with counsel and the deposition officer and address the applicable rules and court orders.This case concerns Texas law. It does not establish Nebraska’s requirements. This article is for general information, not legal advice. For a specific proceeding, consult counsel and follow the rules in that jurisdiction.