Louisville Court Reporters Share 2018 KY State Holidays

Kentucky Administrative Office of Courts Posts 2018 State Holidays

In case you were wondering or trying to make plans, like our Louisville court reporters and Lexington court reporters, you might be interested to know what the official Kentucky state holidays are and how they may impact you. Taylor Court Reporters Kentucky have the dates for you so you can make your plans with confidence. 

Without further ado, here are the official 2018 Kentucky State Holidays as posted by the Kentucky Administrative Office of the Courts:

2018 Kentucky State Holidays

  • Martin Luther King Jr. Day, Monday, January 15
  • Spring Holiday, one-half day, Friday, March 30
  • Memorial Day, Monday, May 28
  • Independence Day, Wednesday, July 4
  • Labor Day, Monday, September 3
  • Veterans Day, Monday, November 12
  • Thanksgiving, Thursday & Friday, November 22-23
  • Christmas, Monday, December 24 & Tuesday, December 25
  • New Year’s, Monday, December 31, 2018 & Tuesday, January 1, 2019

Looking for Louisville court reporters and Lexington court reporters, call Taylor Court Reporters Kentucky, we offer professional Louisville and Lexington court reporting services,  conference rooms, and deposition videoconferencing. We provide Kentucky statewide coverage.

Contact us or use our online form to schedule a deposition with our Louisville court reporters and Lexington court reporters today.  We have what you’re looking for!

Happy Holidays from Taylor Kentucky Court Reporters

Taylor Kentucky Court Reporters Gives to Local Charities

Taylor Louisville Kentucky Court Reporters and Taylor Lexington Kentucky Court Reporters Honors Clients, Colleagues, Friends, and Family by Giving to Local Charities

With the holiday season upon us and the new year fast approaching, it’s now, as the year comes to a close, I find myself reflecting on my experiences and counting my many blessings. Taylor Louisville Kentucky Court Reporters and Taylor Lexington Kentucky Court Reporters have been blessed with many wonderful and thoughtful clients, challenging us to grow with medical malpractice depositions, personal injury depositions, environmental law depositions, and workers’ comp depositions.  We’re also blessed with a talented team of court reporters and office staff who will come together to do what it takes to get the job done. There are; however, many people in Kentucky who are less fortunate, down on their luck or those who may simply be too sick or too tired to count their blessings.  As a way to honor and thank clients, colleagues, friends, and family who have supported us this past year, we remember these less-fortunate souls with a donation to the following organizations:

Home of the Innocents
American Heart Association
Legal Aid Society

Wishing you peace, joy, and prosperity now and in the new year.


Taylor Lexington Kentucky Court Reporters
Taylor Louisville Kentucky Court Reporters

Offering Kentucky court reporting services and Kentucky video court reporting services throughout Kentucky

court reporter Louisville KY & Lexington KY visit courtroom

Court Proposes Changes to Local Rules

I recently received an email “Message from Chief Jefferson Circuit Court Judge Audra J. Eckerle – In lieu of weekly e-brief.”  The email states, “THIS MESSAGE IS BEING SENT ON BEHALF OF CHIEF JEFFERSON CIRCUIT COURT JUDGE AUDRA J. ECKERLE:”

The message begins “The Jefferson Rules of Practice (known informally as the “Local Rules”) have not been amended since 2006.”  The message goes on to say, “Pursuant to SCR 1.040(3)(a), we tender to you now the proposed amendments that the Circuit Court Term has voted to approve.”  See the Proposed Changes

As a member of the Kentucky Court Reporters Association, as well as the Louisville Bar Association, I have some concerns with the proposed changes to Jefferson County’s Local Practice Rules, in particular the section underlined below: 

1202 Filing Depositions with the Court

“CR 30.06 notwithstanding, only the cd/DVD/disc/videotape of the deposition shall be filed with the Clerk. The original hard copy of the deposition shall be maintained by the party noticing the deposition and shall be made available to any party for inspection and/or copying. Excerpts of relevant portions of any deposition may be offered in support of and attached to any pleading with the Court.”

I believe this proposed change places the burden on the taking attorney to maintain, safeguard, and reproduce court records.  For example, the taking attorney may have the responsibility of providing a time and place for any and all parties to handle and inspect the original transcript, quite possibly providing someone to supervise the original’s handling, such as was the case when the court clerks kept watch over those viewing files as they sat in a designated area observable to the clerks.   Some attorneys may not have the copy power to reproduce large-volume transcripts, audio or video recordings, or color copies, adding further complication to reproducing the original.

In addition, I believe opposing counsel will increasingly expect the taking attorney to produce the original for inspection and/or copying at no charge, creating a decrease in revenue to the taxpaying court reporter caused by the loss of a transcript copy sale, which the court reporter created originally.  If court reporters lose that transcript copy sale, our businesses would suffer a significant financial loss.  It would be difficult to continue to pay office rent and expenses, salaries, insurance, and taxes without adding a steep increase to the cost of the original transcript, further burdening the taking attorney with this additional charge.

As I see it, under the proposed change as stated in CR 30.06, a huge and unfair burden would be placed on the taking attorney, that being: 

  1. The increased cost of an original transcript charged by the court reporter to recoup the cost of the lost copy sales. 
  2. Having to furnish a supervised place and time for parties to view the original transcript and exhibits.
  3. Not all attorneys have the setup to allow all parties to come in and view DVDs.

I believe the cost of an attorney-copied original transcript would be more costly than if copied and sold by the court reporter that originally created it because of comment 1 above. The proposed change does not address what a fair charge is for such copy work done by the taking attorney.  Court Reporter’s rates are limited to what the market will bear. 

I propose that the Court continue to allow court reporters to seal the original transcripts until such time as they are deemed necessarily opened by the Court.  If opposing counsel would like a copy of the transcript, I hope we can maintain the status quo, whereby the court reporter is called and asked by counsel to produce a copy for them at a set rate.   By providing a sealed original to the taking attorney, it protects the integrity of the original transcript and exhibits, while not taking up space at the courthouse.

Lastly, I see a conflict in the language between 1201, Section 4 and 1202 as to who maintains the original video.  I propose the video be maintained by the taking attorney, as is the current practice, and filed with the Court as the Court deems necessary.

We at Taylor Court Reporting Kentucky encourage all Kentucky court reporters, Louisville court reporters, Kentucky legal videographersLouisville legal videographers, and attorneys to review the proposed changes and express opinions with Eric Darnell, Circuit Court Administrator, at ericdarnell@kycourts.net or 595-4588 by August 30, 2013.

Linda L. Taylor
Certified Court Reporter – KY