Background
The State Board of Examiners of Certified Shorthand Reporters filed a complaint against certified court reporter Susan Johnson and sought her immediate interim suspension from the Oklahoma Supreme Court. The Board’s request was made pursuant to Rule 6(c) of the Rules Governing Disciplinary Proceedings of the State Board of Examiners of Certified Shorthand Reporters, 20 O.S., Ch. 20, App. II, which authorizes the Board to request suspension where it has received sufficient evidence that a court reporter is unfit to practice and poses an immediate threat of public harm.
The Board alleged that Johnson had engaged in a pattern of failing to timely produce transcripts across multiple independent proceedings. This conduct had resulted in her being charged with indirect contempt of court on at least two separate occasions. The Board contended that her repeated failures had caused unnecessary delays and imposed additional costs and burdens on litigants and the courts. Johnson submitted an initial response to the Board, which was attached to the request as an exhibit, and the Board scheduled a formal evidentiary hearing for August 12, 2026.
The Court’s Holding
The Oklahoma Supreme Court granted the Board’s request and ordered Johnson’s immediate interim suspension as a certified shorthand reporter. The Court reviewed the request and attached exhibits — including Johnson’s own initial response and the Board’s complaint — and concluded that the showing was sufficient to warrant suspension pending a full hearing.
The Court directed Johnson to appear before the Board on August 12, 2026, at the Oklahoma Judicial Center in Oklahoma City, to show cause why the interim suspension should be set aside. The order was concurred in by eight justices, with Justice Kane dissenting.
Key Takeaways
- The Oklahoma Supreme Court has authority under Rule 6(c) to order an immediate interim suspension of a certified court reporter upon the Board’s showing of sufficient evidence of unfitness and an immediate threat of public harm.
- A pattern of failing to produce transcripts in a timely manner — particularly where it has resulted in multiple indirect contempt charges — can constitute sufficient grounds for interim suspension without waiting for a full evidentiary hearing.
- An interim suspension is not final; the respondent is afforded an opportunity to appear and show cause why the suspension should be lifted, with the formal hearing here set for August 12, 2026.
Why It Matters
This order underscores that Oklahoma courts treat chronic transcript delays by certified court reporters as a serious threat to the administration of justice, not merely a procedural inconvenience. The ability to seek immediate interim suspension — before a full disciplinary hearing — gives the Board and the Supreme Court a swift enforcement tool when a reporter’s conduct is disrupting ongoing litigation and harming the public.
For practitioners, the case is a reminder that court reporters are officers within the judicial system subject to regulatory discipline, and that repeated contempt charges for transcript failures can trigger emergency licensing action. Courts and litigants who experience chronic delays from a reporter now have a clearer picture of the disciplinary pathway available to address such conduct.