If a court reporter has a dispute over unpaid fees with their agency, can they request the taking attorney pay them directly?

The correct answer emphasizes that disputes over unpaid fees should be resolved directly between the court reporter and the agency. This is grounded in professional ethics and practice standards which dictate that financial obligations adhere to the established agreements between the parties involved. When a court reporter accepts work through an agency, the agency typically becomes the responsible party for payment. This approach maintains professionalism, ensures accountability, and protects the integrity of the relationship between the court reporter and the agency.

Moreover, allowing direct payment from the attorney could disrupt the established workflow and could potentially lead to conflicts of interest or perceived preferential treatment. It is essential for court reporters to uphold the principles of their professional practice, which includes managing disputes within the framework of their agency agreement.

In contrast, the other options present scenarios that do not align with these ethical standards. The suggestion that payment can be sought directly if the attorney agrees could undermine the agency's role and create confusion about payment responsibilities. The mention of "as a last resort" implies a potential circumvention of proper channels, which is discouraged in professional practice. Lastly, asserting that it is against policy to request direct payment aligns with the obligation to follow procedures established by the agency, reinforcing the point that disputes should be managed internally between the reporter and the agency rather than involving