What should be done if two attorneys disagree on a transcript excerpt?

Consulting with the court for a resolution is the most appropriate action when two attorneys disagree on a transcript excerpt. This process ensures that an official resolution is provided by the presiding judge or court, who can clarify the record or offer guidance on how to address the disagreement within the legal context. It helps maintain an accurate and authoritative record, which is crucial for the integrity of court proceedings and the utility of the transcript in future references or appeals.

Engaging with the court allows for a neutral third party to arbitrate the issue, ensuring that both parties' legal rights and interests are considered in the resolution process. It's important to uphold the accuracy of the transcript, as any inaccuracies could impact legal outcomes or further proceedings.

Alternative options, such as submitting the disagreement in writing, while useful, lack the immediacy and authority that a court consultation would provide, and choosing one attorney's version arbitrarily risks compromising the integrity of the record. Ignoring the disagreement can lead to a significant liability or jeopardize the fairness of the trial process.