Short answer. Yes to both. Rule 132, Section 2 requires the entire proceedings of a trial or hearing — questions, answers, and statements by the judge, parties, counsel, or witnesses — to be recorded by shorthand, stenotype, or another suitable method, and a certified transcript made from that record is deemed prima facie a correct statement of what happened.
What the law says
The entire proceedings of a trial or hearing, including the questions propounded to a witness and his or her answers thereto, and the statements made by the judge or any of the parties, counsel, or witnesses with reference to the case, shall be recorded
Rule 132, Section 2 — Proceedings to be recorded. Read the full provision →
What the law says
A transcript of the record of the proceedings made by the official stenographer, stenotypist or recorder and certified as correct by him or her, shall be deemed prima facie a correct statement of such proceedings.
Rule 132, Section 2 — Proceedings to be recorded. Read the full provision →
What has to be captured, not just some of it
Section 2 is written broadly on purpose. It reaches the entire proceedings of a trial or hearing, expressly including the questions propounded to a witness and his or her answers thereto, and the statements made by the judge or any of the parties, counsel, or witnesses with reference to the case. The intent is to leave a complete record, not a summary or a set of highlights chosen after the fact by whoever is doing the recording.
How the recording is made
The rule allows recording by means of shorthand or stenotype or by other means of recording found suitable by the court, giving courts some flexibility in method rather than locking them into one specific technology. Whatever method is used, the underlying obligation is the same: capture the proceedings as they actually happened, in a form that can later be turned into a written record.
Why the certified transcript carries weight on its own
Once the official stenographer, stenotypist, or recorder certifies the transcript as correct, it is deemed prima facie a correct statement of such proceedings. That means a party relying on the transcript later — to argue what a witness actually said, or what the judge actually ruled from the bench — does not need to separately prove the transcript's accuracy each time; it stands as accurate unless someone successfully shows otherwise.
What this means practically
For someone involved in litigation, this rule is the reason a transcript can later settle disputes about what was actually said or promised during a hearing, rather than the matter coming down to competing memories. If you believe a transcript is wrong about something material — a misheard word, a garbled exchange — that is a challenge to the prima facie correctness the certification carries, and it needs to be raised and supported, not simply asserted.
Related provisions
- Rule 132, Section 2 — Proceedings to be recorded
- Rule 132, Section 1 — Examination to be done in open court
- Rule 132, Section 3 — Rights and obligations of a witness