Summary
The Supreme Court of Texas held that a court reporter is not entitled to derived judicial immunity for errors in preparing a reporter's record. Applying a functional approach, the Court concluded that preparing the record is a ministerial or administrative task that does not involve discretionary judgment comparable to that of a judge. The Court reversed the court of appeals' judgment for Sandra Halsey and remanded the case for further proceedings.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether a court reporter is entitled to derived judicial immunity for errors allegedly committed while preparing a reporter's record at a party's request.
- Whether the preparation of a reporter's record involves discretionary judgment comparable to that of a judge for purposes of derived judicial immunity.
Holdings
- A court reporter is not entitled to derived judicial immunity for acts performed in preparing a reporter's record because that function does not involve judicial decisionmaking or discretionary judgment comparable to that of a judge.
- Texas courts must use a functional approach when determining whether a court officer receives derived judicial immunity, examining the nature of the function performed and whether the conduct is like that of the delegating or appointing judge.
Key quotations
“In preparing the record, the court reporter does not participate in the judicial decisionmaking process or exercise discretion.” (87 S.W.3d at 557)
“Therefore, when preparing a reporter's record, the court reporter cannot be construed as the functional equivalent of a judge, and the court reporter's actions do not fall under the protection of judicial immunity.” (87 S.W.3d at 557)
Factual background
Halsey was the official court reporter for a Dallas County criminal district court and recorded the trial in State of Texas v. Darlie Lynn Routier. At Dallas County's request, she separately prepared the reporter's record and was paid approximately $63,000 based on submitted invoices. After another court reporter found approximately 18,000 errors in the 6,000-page record, Dallas County sued Halsey to recover the payment and assert related claims.
Procedural history
Dallas County sued Halsey, a certified official court reporter, for fraud, breach of contract, and violations of the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act, seeking return of approximately $63,000 paid to prepare a reporter's record. The trial court denied Halsey's summary-judgment motion asserting derived judicial immunity. The court of appeals reversed and rendered judgment that Halsey was immune and that Dallas County take nothing. The Supreme Court of Texas reversed and remanded for further proceedings in the trial court.
Remand instructions
The cause was remanded to the trial court for further proceedings.