Third BAR/BRI suit filed over prices, Nat'l L.J. (web-only), Feb. 26, 2008:
Eliot Disner, the lawyer who objected to a $49 million class action settlement last year in an antitrust case he filed against the makers of the BAR/BRI bar review preparatory course, has filed a third suit to break up an alleged monopoly [Thomson West] and reimburse students for the inflated prices they paid.
The Federal Bar Association for the Western District of Washington sponsors a clinic to assist federal pro se litigants. The Federal Civil Rights Legal Clinic, started in March 2006, is affiliated with the King County Bar Association's Neighborhood Legal Clinics. Tracy M. Morris, Filling the Gap: How the Federal Civil Rights Legal Clinic is Making a Difference, Fed. B. Ass'n W.D. Wash. News, Fall 2007, at 5.
The Federal Bar Association (W.D. Wash.) has a Profile of Judge Benjamin H. Settle in its fall newsletter. Judge Settle took the bench -- Western District of Washington, in Tacoma -- July 2, 2007.
The Federal Bar Association of the Western District of Washington sponsors the William L. Dwyer Jury Project Award writing competition. Submissions are due April 4, 2008. UW law students, if you've got thoughts about the jury system, write them down -- you can even use a related paper you've already written -- and you might win $2,000.
Last year's winner was John Goldmark (class of '08) for A Better Cross-Section of the Community: Bolstering the Quality, Function, and Legitimacy of the Jury, Fed. B. Ass'n. W. Dist. Wash. News, Fall 2007, at 11.
Second place went to Arleta Young for “Public Perception of the Jury Trial: Cause and Effect.” And the committee gave honorable mention to Woo Koo (Chris) Choi (a visiting student from Korea) for “The Japanese Jury System.” (See newsletter article.)
Attorneys for Conner Schierman -- who is accused of killing four people and burning their house -- moved to have the case dismissed (because prosecutors hadn't provided discovery), to allow Mr. Schierman to way civilian clothes to pre-trial hearings, and to prohibit press photography in public courthouse spaces. Judge Gregory Canova denied the motions. Suspect in slayings of Kirkland family must wear jail uniform in court, Seattle P-I, Feb. 22, 2008; Judge won't restrict media in trial of man accused of killing Kirkland family, Seattle Times, Feb. 22, 2008.
The Seattle Times and several television stations opposed the motion to prohibit press photography. Under the Washington Courts' Bench Bar Press Statement of Principles
Law enforcement and court personnel should not prevent the photographing of defendants when they are in public places outside the courtroom. They should not encourage pictures or televising nor should they pose the defendant. The media should recognize that broadcasting, televising, recording and taking photographs in the courtroom is governed by GR 16. Artist's renditions sketched in the courtroom are not governed by GR 16 and should not be curtailed unless such actions unduly distract participants or impair the dignity of the proceedings.King County Deputy Prosecutor Scott O'Toole is quoted in the Times article. He is also a UW Trial Ad instructor.
This morning's Parade has an article by Justice Sandra Day O'Connor expressing concern about partisan pressures in states that elect judges. How to Save Our Courts, Parade, Feb. 24, 2008.
Justice O'Connor says that she is now involved with two projects:
The King County Bar Association has an interesting CLE coming up March 7: The Lawyer As Detective: Effective & Ethical Informal Discovery.
Law students, remember that KCBA offers a limited number of spots in its CLEs free to law students. So when you see a CLE you'd like to attend, contact KCBA's CLE Manager, Denise Medlock, DeniseM[at]kcba.org.
Smelter case a big mess in more ways than one, News Tribune (Tacoma), Feb. 22, 2008. An overview of the complex dispute involving the pollution of Washington's Lake Roosevelt (the lake behind Grand Coulee Dam) by a Canadian Smelter -- EPA (under two presidents), Washington State, the Colville tribe, ...
The article quotes Prof. Michael Robinson-Dorn, the director of the UW's Berman Environmental Law Clinic. For more (lots more!) about the case, see Michael J. Robinson-Dorn, The Trail Smelter: Is What's Past Prologue? EPA Blazes a New Trail for CERCLA, 14 N.Y.U. Envtl. L.J. 233 (2006) , available at SSRN and Prof. Robinson-Dorn's website providing copies of opinions, briefs, pleadings, and other material.
Photo of Lake Roosevelt from the Governor's Salmon Recovery Office. (Beautiful, isn't it? You can't tell how many heavy metals and other pollutants are in a lake just by looking at it.)
KUOW's Weekday featured a discussion on Shame and the Law with Martha Nussbaum, Feb. 20, 2008:
A lawmaker in Washington State proposes fluorescent–yellow license plates as a punishment for drunk driving. A judge in Massachusetts forces a college kid to stand in front of a police station wearing a toga. Are these so–called 'shaming laws' making a comeback? What are the origins of these laws? Should an emotion like shaming play a major role in our legal system today? Do shaming laws work? We'll take up these question and more this hour with legal thinkers including Martha Nussbaum of the University of Chicago.
Guests:
Steve Calandrillo is Professor of Law at the University of Washington.
Dan Markel [more here] is assistant professor at Florida State University College of Law.
Martha Nussbaum is Ernst Freund Distinguished Service Professor of Law and Ethics at the University of Chicago. She's the author of articles and books including Hiding from Humanity: Disgust, Shame, and the Law [K346 .N87 2004 at Classified Stacks].
Rebecca Griego was killed in her office at the UW by her ex-boyfriend, whom she had been trying unsuccessfully to serve with a protection order. Now her mother and sister are supporting a bill that would provide alternate means of service. Family of UW worker seeks new law, Seattle Times, Feb. 21, 2008.
The bill is ESB 6357. Its companion in the House is HB 2563.
In 1996 Stephen Danforth was convicted of sexual conduct with a minor. His alleged victim, a six-year-old, did not testify, but the jury was shown a videotape interview with her. In 2004, the Supreme Court in Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36, Findlaw, ruled that testimonial statements -- even in recordings -- must be subject to cross-examination. So Danforth sought post-conviction relief in Minnesota.
The state court declined the relief because it did not think it had the option to extend the rule announced in Crawford retroactively. Today the Supreme Court held otherwise -- the state court isn't required to apply the rule retroactively, but it can do so. And so the case is reversed an remanded. Danforth v. Minnesota, No. 06-8273, Court website.
See Lyle Denniston, Analysis: ‘Creating’ or ‘declaring’ rights, SCOTUSblog, Feb. 20, 2008:
Perhaps it is not enough to gladden the hearts of true “originalists,” but a clear majority of the Supreme Court has newly acknowledged that, when it comes to constitutional rights, they always existed and did not just emerge out of modern judicial creativity. That concept, most closely identified with the jurisprudence of Justice Antonin Scalia, is a basic rationale behind Wednesday’s 7-2 decision in Danforth v. Minnesota (06-8273) . . .
Justices Make It Tougher to Sue Medical Device Makers, N.Y. Times, Feb. 20, 2008:
In a case with huge implications for the health care-technology industry, the Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday that the manufacturer of a federally approved medical device cannot be sued under state law if the device causes an injury.The case is Riegel v. Medtronic, Inc., no. 06-179, Court website (Feb. 20, 2008).
A transgendered prisoner, who is anatomically male but identifies as a woman, lost his suit seeking to have Oregon pay for sex-change surgery and transfer her to a women's prison. Oregon inmate loses sex-change lawsuit, Seattle Times, Feb. 19, 2008.
I found the following in a blog opposing mandatory minimum sentencing laws, Oregonians Against Measure 11:
A lawsuit by an Oregon inmate demanding a sex-change operation spotlights the increasing complexity and cost of providing health services to the state’s 13,500 prisoners.Care needs of prisoners put Oregon in a bind, Oregonians Against Measure 11, Nov. 12, 2007.
Anny May Stevens, a Portland man serving an 18-year sentence for manslaughter, contends in court papers that prison officials denied him medical treatment for transsexualism.
“I didn’t ask to be born this way,” Stevens, 45, said in an interview from Snake River Correctional Institution in Ontario. “But I sure don’t want to die this way.”
Prison officials don’t dispute Stevens’ diagnosis, but they rejected his request, arguing in court papers that neither hormone treatment nor surgery is medically necessary.
Though transsexual inmates are rare, prison officials report a surging demand from inmates for a wide array of conditions, diseases and mental illnesses.
The Center for the Study of Justice in Society at Seattle University and the Center for Global Justice at Seattle University School of Law present Globalization & Justice: Interdisciplinary Dialogues, Feb. 21-22, 2008. The program is open to the public and it's free.
Bill Marler sent me a link about a CLE Seattle University is presenting April 11-12,Who's Minding the Store? The Current State of Food Safety and How It Can Be Improved. Looks interesting!
Do you want to write an article about changes that have affected judges in the last fifty years -- or that are on the horizon? Consider responding to this call for papers:
The Widener Law Journal is commemorating the fiftieth anniversary of the founding of the National Conference of State Trial Judges by publishing essays and articles discussing the changes that have affected trial judges over the last fifty years. Pieces will be published in the Spring 2009 issue of the Journal, in time for the August 2009 (July 30 - Aug. 4) American Bar Association meeting in Chicago, where the Conference and its members will be honored and the Journal’s work would be recognized.
Writings may discuss any aspect of the evolution of the trial judge, including, but not limited to, the following:
• the impact of changes in evidence relating to technological advancement;
• the increasing popularity of specialized courts such as drug and business courts;
• the role of the judiciary in formulating public policy;
• the erosion or importance of judicial independence at the trial level;
• the perennial conflict over methods of judicial selection; and
• the potential evolution of the trial courts over the next several decades
Accordingly, the Widener Law Journal welcomes pieces from all disciplines including, but not limited to, political science, history, and traditional legal analyses. Interested scholars, judges, and members of the practicing bar are asked to submit proposals to the Law Journal by September 1, 2008, and to submit completed works by December 1, 2008. Questions may be directed to Michael Dimino, faculty advisor to the Journal, at 717-541-3941 or mrdimino[at]mail.widener.edu.
Druggists can deny Plan B, judge rules:
Pharmacies and pharmacists with religious or moral objections to 'Plan B' emergency contraception may continue to refuse to dispense it until a lawsuit is settled, a federal judge ruled Friday.See also Judge again rules druggists can deny morning-after pill, Seattle P-I, Feb. 15, 2008.
The state had asked Judge Ronald Leighton of the U.S. District Court to reinstate rules requiring pharmacists and pharmacies to dispense all legal medications, pending outcome of an appeal. Last year, Leighton suspended the rules as they pertain to Plan B, the so-called 'morning-after pill,' by granting an injunction.
State crime-lab chief to resign, Seattle Times, Feb. 15, 2008:
[Barry Logan,] The embattled director of the State Patrol crime labs has resigned, accepting responsibility for allegations of sloppy work and fraud that jeopardized more than 100 DUI breath-test results in the past year.
When people cannot handle their own affairs, courts often appoint guardians -- but not all guardians are competent, careful, diligent, and honorable. A report from AARP and the ABA looks at successful practices by courts.
Despite a dramatic strengthening of statutory standards in recent years, judicial monitoring practices vary substantially by jurisdiction. This AARP Public Policy Institute (PPI) Research Report by Naomi Karp (PPI) and Erica Wood (American Bar Association Commission on Law and Aging) describes methods for helping courts protect some of our society's most vulnerable people. Through site visits to exemplary courts, the authors have identified promising approaches that can be replicated by courts around the country.Press release, Dec. 2007.
The initial implementation of public guardianship services shall be on a pilot basis in a minimum of two geographical areas that include one urban area and one rural area. The Office of Public Guardianship plans to release a Request for Proposal (RFP) January 2008. The pilot programs will be selected from submitted proposals which satisfy the RFP critieria.The RFP is here, with an addendum here. Proposals were due Feb. 8.
SSB 6402 would require people convicted of DUIs to have a special flourescent yellow license plate on their cars for the year after they regain their driving privileges (after a suspension, say). Search Bill proposes "scarlet letter" for DUIs: bright-yellow license plates, Seattle Times, Feb. 12, 2008.
Supporters say that the special plate will help law enforcement keep an eye on these drivers in case they reoffend and will help the rest of us watch out for them on the road (again, in case they reoffend). They also say that shaming will be a deterrent to driving drunk in the first place. Asked why the spouse of an offender should be shamed when sharing the car, they reply that that will also be a deterrent: a driver wouldn't want to expose his or her family to that.
I just don't see it as a deterrent. People who have had too much to drink are not great analysts in the first place. But it's ridiculous to imagine that they'll think: "If I drive and I'm busted and I'm convicted then in a year or two my wife might be ashamed to drive our family car, so I'll call a cab." If the risks of being ticketed or getting in an accident -- totalling their cars and injuring themselves and others -- aren't enough of a deterrent, this future shaming won't be either.
Worse, the shaming could have the opposite of its intended effect. Psychological studies have found that shame actually makes people MORE likely to reoffend. Shame as a feeling overwhelms people with a sense that they are bad -- not that they did a bad thing that they can avoid in the future, but that they are bad. And that leads to more offending, not less. See my earlier post on the work of June Price Tangney and her colleagues.
IRS Flouts Court Orders, TRAC press release, Feb. 11, 2008:
The Internal Revenue Service is flouting three court orders requiring it to regularly provide a nationally-recognized researcher with the statistical data she needs for her studies, according to a court action brought today by the researcher.Prof. Long is co-director of the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse. She is represented by Scott Nelson (Public Citizen Litigation Group) and Eric M. Stahl (Davis Wright Tremaine). A copy of the 25-page motion is here and the 102-page supporting declaration is here.
The new motion was filed by Susan B. Long, a professor at Syracuse University's Martin J. Whitman School of Management. For more than 30 years Long has used the IRS's own statistical data to examine how this powerful agency has been enforcing the nation's tax laws.
In the February 11 filing Long requests that Judge Marsha Pechman of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington enforce two of her own court orders against the agency, issued in 2006, as well as the court's 1976 consent agreement on the same issue.
Three firms indicted in pet-food recall case - USATODAY.com:
Two Chinese companies and a U.S. importer were indicted by a federal grand jury Wednesday for allegedly supplying contaminated ingredients that led to the USA's biggest pet-food recall and the deaths of many pets last year.USA Today has posted copies of the indictments (from W.D. Mo.).
The firms were charged with 26 counts of introducing adulterated and misbranded food into the USA.
The Washington Supreme Court reversed a conviction for telephone harassment yesterday because the jury instructions did not make it clear that the defendant must have intended to harass at the time she initiated the call. State v. Lilyblad, No.9114-7, courts website (Wash. S. Ct. Feb. 7, 2008) (Owens, J.). (If you just skim the opinion, the case name might confuse you. The Court uses the defendant's preferred surname of Paris.)
Divisions I and II of the Court of Appeals had split on interpretation of RCW 9.61.230, Telephone harassment:
(1) Every person who, with intent to harass, intimidate, torment or embarrass any other person, shall make a telephone call to such other person:Now, if you (1) intend to harass X, (2) call X, (3) threaten X -- in that order -- it's clear the statute applies. But what if you (1) intend to call your son (who lives with X), (2) chat with your son, (3) talk to X once she picks up the phone, and THEN (4) form the intent to threaten X and say you'll F-ing kill her?
* * *
(c) Threatening to inflict injury on the person or property of the person called or any member of his or her family or household;
is guilty of a gross misdemeanor * * *.
Hit woman sentenced to 20 years in prison, Seattle Times, Feb. 8, 2008:
A former-prostitute-turned-hitwoman was sentenced this morning to 20 years in prison nearly three decades after she told a prosecutor that she shot and killed a South Seattle auto mechanic because she heard his death was worth $10,000.A large part of the story has to do with the flow of information -- should the prosecutor the hitwoman went to seeking immunity have told others about her statements? When?
Abuse defendant kills self as Clark County jury deliberates, Seattle Times, Feb. 8, 2008. The defendant, who was accused of sexually abusing a family member, took an overdose of pills at home yesterday morning. Before the court learned of his death, the Judge John F. Nichols had declared a mistrial because the jury reported it was unable to reach a verdict.
Jur-E Bulletin is a weekly email "newsletter published by the Center for Jury Studies and the National Center for State Courts' Knowledge and Information Services Division and Jury Community of Practice. It contains information on the weekly happenings in the jury world, including media coverage, prominent court decisions, and important developments on all things jury."
The articles are very short -- usually just a quick summary with a link. For example, this week's issue includes:
Wouldn't it be great to get short, understandable, practical tips about trial practice sent to your email? Try out Elliott Wilcox's free Trial Tips Newsletter.
In the latest issue, he reflects on that standby question of direct examination, "What happened next."
Without guidance, your witness may be thinking, “What happened next? Well, the earth spun on its axis and rotated around the sun; my heartbeat sped up; I took a breath; a white car passed by me in the left lane; a man wearing a red jacket stepped off the sidewalk; I turned to the southeast; the traffic light turned from green to yellow; two men walked out of the grocery store; a lady ten feet to my left ducked down and screamed; I unholstered my concealed firearm; my partner opened the trunk of the patrol car... A lot of things happened 'next.' Which one did you want me to talk about? Oh, the shots that were fired? Yeah, I heard that too.”I also like Elliott's regular "Quotations for Lawyers." This week's:
“What happened next?” is simply too broad a question. It allows for a whole world of possible responses. If you want to help your witness tell his story more effectihttp://www.blogger.com/img/gl.link.gifvely, give him some idea of what he's supposed to say by focusing his attention toward a narrower range of responses. Instead of asking, “What happened next,” ask something like this:
- “Where did you drive to next?”
- “Who did you speak to after that?”
- “What was the next test you performed on the substance?”
- “How does the man in the white jacket react?”
- “Let's focus your attention on the operating nurse. What does she do next?”
In theory there is no difference between theory and practice.Elliott has some many tips bubbling out he doesn't limit himself to the newsletter. Also check out his Winning Trial Advocacy Techniques blog. What the heck, take a look all around his website. It's good!
In practice, there is.
– YOGI BERRA
Racial remarks prompt new trial, Spokesman Review, Jan. 26, 2008:
A Spokane County Superior Court judge has ordered a new trial in a medical malpractice case where a Spokane attorney of Japanese descent was repeatedly referred to as 'Mr. Kamikaze' and other racially charged names during jury deliberations.One juror said that the verdict against the Japanese American attorney's client being read on Pearl Harbor Day was "almost appropriate."
Judge Robert D. Austin said he was surprised when he received attorney Mark D. Kamitomo's motion for a new trial in mid-December, based in part on the racial comments.
"We'd hoped we'd moved beyond this, and we apparently have not. It's upsetting," a visibly emotional Austin said during a court hearing Friday.
Seattle attorney Bill Marler represented one of the children poisoned by e. coli in a Jack in the Box meal by in 1993 and since then has made a specialty of food safety litigation. E. Coli Lawyer Is Busier Than Ever, Associated Press, Feb. 4, 2008.
"Bill was certainly at the right place at the right time entering the field of food safety litigation," says Caroline Smith DeWaal, who is in charge of food safety at the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest in Washington. "I see him in kind of a private attorney general role."In a better, safer world, he wouldn't bring so many suits (or at least not in this area):
Marler continually implores the food industry to "put me out of business" by adopting more stringent safety procedures. He sent the lettuce industry a letter in 2006 in which he called on growers to stop using irrigation water contaminated with cattle and human feces, to wash fruits and vegetables more thoroughly, and to provide field hands with bathrooms.To keep up with Bill and food safety law, see Marlerblog.
"These steps will help make our food supply safer and will enable us to keep our most vulnerable citizens — kids and seniors — out of harm's way," he wrote. "And, with a little luck, it will force one damn trial lawyer to find another line of work."
A couple of years ago I picked up Ultimate Punishment by Scott Turow (available in the library: KF9227.C2 T87 2003 at Good Reads). This slender book -- subtitled "a lawyer's reflections on dealing with the death penalty" -- relates Turow's experience handling a couple of death penalty appeals pro bono and serving on the Illinois commission that looked at the death penalty. He said he began as a "death penalty agnostic" -- not opposed, not for -- and ended up so concerned that the report he participated in led to Gov. Ryan's decision to declare a moratorium on the punishment.
This is a thoughtful discussion of the issues. And you already know that Turow can write in a way that keeps you reading!
Death penalty decision in Carnation slayings delayed to MaySeattle P-I, Feb. 2, 2008.
Attorneys for Joseph McEnroe and Michele Anderson, both 29, said they hope for still more time to learn more about the suspects and offer information aimed at persuading Prosecutor Dan Satterberg that death sentences are not deserved.The law behind the timing question is RCW 10.95.040, which requires the prosecutor to file notice of seeking the death penalty within 30 days of arraignment.
Anderson's attorney, Kevin Dolan, said he needed to explore her mental health issues and other aspects of her life. While saying little about her specific case, he said that in potential death-penalty cases, sometimes "you have a monstrous act, but not a monster."
If you law and order types, salivating at the chance to kill these two in an effort to satisfy your bloodlust for revenge, actually understood our criminal justice system, you'd want the prosecutor to take as long as it takes to exhaust all possible options, to examine every possible aspect to this case, and to compile every possible bit of data so that the convictions - if we get that far - stick and are not overthrown on a technicality by a higher court.
If you want convictions, and you want the ultimate penalty, you had better be patient for the system to work.
Cinerama's peeping Tom won't serve time, Seattle P-I, Feb. 1, 2008. Pursuant to a plea agreement, the 21-year-old defendant will do 30 days of community service, undergo sexual deviancy screening, and be monitored by a probation officer for a year. The most significant penalty is being required to register as a sex offender for the next ten years.
"This was a very dumb mistake," [Philip Michael] Thomas told Judge Chris Washington. "I'm deeply sorry for what I did."
But Washington pointed out before sentencing Thomas that setting up a video camera on several occasions wasn't a momentary lapse of judgment.
"It's a bit more than just dumb," he said. "You're going to have explaining to do, probably for the rest of your life."
In response to violence against gay men, lesbians, and transgendered people on Capitol Hill, King County Prosecutor Dan Satterberg has released a poster to increase public awareness and promote personal safety, encouraging people to avoid confronting an offender and to call 911 instead. Press release, Jan. 31, 2008; Posters Warn of Hate Crimes, Seattle P-I, Feb. 2, 2008, Hate Crimes Alert Campaign, KPLU (audio), Feb. 1, 2008.
This obituary paints a warm portrait of a lawyer from an earlier generation: In life and law, deceased lawyer Bill Williams showed faith in people, Seattle Times, Jan. 31, 2008. This UW grad set up practice in Kenmore in 1955.
Those of you who came to this area within the last 20 years might think of Kenmore as just "more of the same" in the suburb of Shoreline-Lake Forest Park-Mountlake Terrace-Bothell. In 1955, I imagine it looked a lot different!
The Washington Supreme Court is considering a number of proposed court rules. Comments are due by April 30. Proposals include these two Evidence Rules:
Submitted by the Board of Governors of the Washington State Bar Association
Purpose: In 2005, the Supreme Court held that evidence of negotiations or compromise between a criminal defendant and a victim in efforts to compromise a potential civil claim is admissible in the criminal trial of the defendant, on grounds that ER 408 does not apply in criminal trials. See State v. O’Connor, 155 Wn.2d 335, 119 P.3d 806 (2005). The intent of this suggested amendment is to codify the O’Connor decision. A companion amendment to ER 410 also responds to the O’Connor decision.
ER 410. INADMISSIBILITY OF PLEAS, OFFERS OF PLEAS, AND RELATED STATMENTS
Submitted by the Board of Governors of the Washington State Bar Association
Purpose: In 2005, the Supreme Court held that evidence of negotiations or compromise between a criminal defendant and a victim in efforts to compromise a potential civil claim is admissible in the criminal trial of the defendant, on grounds that ER 408 does not apply in criminal trials. See State v. O’Connor, 155 Wn.2d 335, 119 P.3d 806 (2005). The Court reasoned that the policy favoring civil settlements reflected in ER 408, although sufficient in a civil case to bar evidence relating to settlements and offers to settle, is insufficient in criminal cases. A companion amendment to ER 408 is intended to codify the O’Connor decision by expressly limiting ER 408 to civil cases.
Under RCW Chapter 10.22, if a defendant is prosecuted for a misdemeanor and the victim also has a civil remedy, the criminal prosecution may be compromised, subject to certain exceptions. RCW 10.22.010-.020. If the victim shows the court that he or she has received satisfaction for the injury, the court, in its discretion, may dismiss the charges. RCW 10.22.020. The Legislature has also created a civil action and civil penalties for criminal conversion of goods or merchandise or for not paying restaurant or hotel bills. See RCW 4.24.230. In these instances, the policy favoring civil settlements is heightened despite the possibility of a related criminal prosecution.
ER 410 makes evidence of criminal plea negotiations inadmissible in both civil and criminal trials. The suggested amendment would add a new paragraph (b) to the rule, intended to render evidence of civil negotiations or compromise pursuant to these statutes inadmissible in civil or criminal proceedings.
RCW 40.24 enables victims of domestic violence, stalking, or sexual assault to use an alternate address, so that state agencies may respond to public record requests without revealing their location. SB 6339, introduced Jan. 15 by Sen. Jeanne Kohl-Welles, would extend this protection to victims of trafficking.
This afternoon Associate Dean Lisa Kelly was installed as the Bobbe and Jon Bridge Professor in Child Advocacy.
Prof. Kelly's lecture, "Telling Children’s Stories: Legal Advocacy for Children and Youth," described the work of the Children and Youth Advocacy Clinic, which she directs. Most of the clinic's clients are kids between 12 and 18 who are in the foster care system. She talked about the difference that having an advocate can make in these children's lives. It was an interesting and moving talk.
Meanwhile, yesterday's P-I applauded a pilot program that the Clinic hopes to manage.
A promising bill from Rep. Pat Lantz would create an experiment giving all children an attorney when they face dependency hearings that determine whether they are placed in foster care, under what conditions their parents can keep them or have them back home and the like. The two-county pilot project envisioned by HB3048 is an excellent opportunity to see if legal representation makes a significant difference for kids, as we suspect it will.Foster Care: Worthy legal pilot, Seattle P-I, Jan. 30, 2008. The first person to comment on the editorial said: "In my almost 50 years of professional Social Work (including work with and within children's programs) this is the best idea I have heard."
The pilot project, administered through the University of Washington School of Law's Children and Youth Advocacy Clinic, would offer every child 12 and older the help of a trained attorney for dependency cases. The project would measure results such as whether there is more attention from a caseworker, more visits with siblings and separated parents, and better educational progress.
Judges reject DUI breath-test results, Seattle Times, Jan. 31, 2008:
In a ruling that could affect thousands of cases, a panel of King County judges said Wednesday that the state's toxicology lab engaged in 'fraudulent and scientifically unacceptable' practices that have compromised breath-test readings used to prosecute suspected drunken drivers.The "blistering 29-page ruling," State v. Ahmach (King County Dist. Ct. Jan. 30, 2008), is here. The judges on the panel were David Steiner, Darrell Phillipson, and Mark Chow.
The ruling directly affects eight cases currently before King County District Courts and more than 100 on hold pending the ruling. But it also could affect thousands that have already been resolved, because it is expected to open the door for appeals, attorneys say.
Kiowa Anko calendar on buckskin, ca. 1871 - ca. 1907 (Smithsonian Institution, Bureau of American Ethnology. National Archives ARC identifier 523631.)
Prof. Catherine Struve (University of Pennsylvania) sent this message to a list for Civil Procedure professors. With her permission, I'm posting it here:
I write to invite you to participate in the public-comment process for the many rules of procedure that were published for comment last August.
As you know, proposed amendments to the Appellate, Bankruptcy, Civil and Criminal Rules were published for comment in August, and comments on those proposals are due by February 15. One set of proposals concerns the method for computing time under all those sets of rules, and as the reporter to the subcommittee that coordinates the time-computation project I wanted to make sure to draw those proposals to your attention. A full explanation of the proposals can be found at http://www.uscourts.gov/rules/newrules1.htm (scroll down to the bottom of the page).
In brief, the principal time-computation proposal is to adopt a “days-are-days” approach to computing all periods of time, including short time periods. Under the current rules, intermediate weekends and holidays are omitted when computing short time periods but included when computing longer periods. By contrast, under the new proposal, intermediate weekends and holidays are counted no matter the length of the specified period.
The project has been published for comment as proposed amendments to Appellate Rule 26(a), Bankruptcy Rule 9006(a), Civil Rule 6(a), and Criminal Rule 45(a). Also published for comment are proposed amendments to numerous deadlines set by the Appellate, Bankruptcy, Civil and Criminal Rules; the goal of those amendments is to offset the effect of the change in time-counting approach by lengthening most short rule-based deadlines. In large measure, the rules-provided deadlines have been sufficiently lengthened to make the change to a days-are-days approach neutral to practitioners; moreover, in a few notable instances – such as the proposal to lengthen the current 10-day deadlines in Civil Rules 50, 52, and 59(b), (d) and (e) to 30 days – the deadlines proposals will give practitioners significantly more time than they now have. The new time-computation rules will govern a number of statutory deadlines that do not themselves provide a method for computing time, and so one of the project's current goals is to identify key statutory deadlines that the Standing Committee should recommend that Congress lengthen in order to offset the change in time-computation approach.
Your comments on any and all aspects of these proposals would be appreciated. Comments can be submitted electronically to Rules_Comments[at]ao.uscourts.gov .
Thanks in advance for your input!
Nickels backs police panel's 29 reforms, Seattle P-I, Jan. 29, 2008. (I think this will be in tomorrow's print paper; it's on the website this evening.)
And, speaking of police, see this morning's long front-page story, Lewis Kamb & Eric Nalder, Cops who lie don't always lose jobs: P-I review finds 2 dozen cases where officers weren't fired, Seattle P-I, Jan. 29, 2008.
Duke prosecutor removed from lawsuit, Seattle P-I, Jan. 29, 2008.
Attorneys for players Reade Seligmann, Collin Finnerty and Dave Evans later sued Nifong, the city of Durham, police investigators and others. The suit accuses them of conducting "one of the most chilling episodes of premeditated police, prosecutorial and scientific misconduct in modern American history."The article doesn't explain why prosecutor Nifong was removed from the suit, but it says that the suit is the chief reason for his recent bankruptcy filing.
What factors influence jurors' decisions in medical malpractice cases? Writing in the Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (a magazine you don't see in the grocery check-out line), a member of Harvard's Trial Ad faculty summarizes the research. Linda S. Crawford, Why Winners Win: Decision Making in Medical Malpractice Cases, J Am Acad Orthop Surg. vol. 15 Suppl 1:S70-4 (2007).
She organizes the article around four questions jurors ask: Whom can I trust in this lawsuit? (This includes comments about attorneys, experts, and the plaintiff.) If I were in a medical crisis, would I be in safe hands with this physician? In the circumstances, did the physician do the best he or she could? Did he or she make the right medical decision?
Summary
Juries make their decisions first and foremost based on their evaluation
of the individual before them. Issues of character trump all other presumptions.
Presuming the medicine is sound, the physician who passes the character test will be given the benefit of the doubt on his or her medicine. The challenge is to be that person of character in the often difficult, hostile environment of the courtroom.
In 2001 Frederick Russell's SUV hit a car with 7 WSU students, killing 3 and seriously injuring 3. He only this fall was tried, because he left the country and lived in Ireland until he was found and extradited. Frederick Russell was convicted of vehicular homicide Nov. 6 and sentenced Jan. 2. Russell sentenced to 14 years, Spokesman Review, Jan. 3, 2008.
Tossing away a prepared statement, Russell took a deep breath, fingered a black rosary with a silver cross provided by a former employer who had spoken on his behalf, and said, “I’m sorry. You waited too long to hear that.”Russell is represented by Franscisco Duarte, who is also a UW Trial Ad instructor.
3 sue state over access to records, Seattle Times, Jan. 11, 2008:
Two women and a teenage girl who say they were abused by a foster father [Enrique Fabregas] filed suit Thursday claiming the state improperly withheld records related to their case.The plaintiffs are represented by former Trial Ad instructor David Moody.
You don't often have litigation covered by a newspaper's music critic, but here's a story: Melissa Bargreen, Symphony violinist's lawsuit dismissed, Seattle Times, Jan. 25, 2008.
Violinist Peter Kaman's personal-injury lawsuit against the Seattle Symphony was dismissed this morning in King County Superior Court, but Kaman isn't done fighting: "This case isn't over until the fat lady sings," he said following the ruling.The ruling turned on the statute of limitations. Over the violinist's 20+ years with the symphony, he experienced treatment amounting to the tort of outrage, Judge Shaffer said, but not within the three year statute of limitations. See also Melinda Bargreen, Symphony player loses ruling, gains confidence, Seattle Times, Jan. 26, 2008.
The Seattle Symphony violinist plans to appeal Judge Catherine Shaffer's dismissal of his discrimination suit. The lawsuit originally presented two claims of discrimination and one claim alleging "outrage," or "the intentional infliction of emotional distress," according to Kaman's attorney, Brenda Little. The two discrimination claims were dismissed last November; the third claim was dismissed Friday.
Suspect in stabbing faces murder charge, Seattle Times, Jan. 27, 2008.
James Anthony Williams will be charged Tuesday with the first-degree murder of a 31-year-old Sierra Club worker outside her condominium on New Year's Eve, the King County Prosecuting Attorney's Office announced Saturday.Scott O'Toole is a UW Trial Ad instructor.
Authorities said Williams, 48, said he stabbed Shannon Harps.
Williams has a history of violence and has been diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia.
But Senior Deputy Prosecutor Scott O'Toole said his office has concluded "he is competent" to stand trial for the death of Harps, based on Williams' interviews with authorities and his demeanor.
I came across this and I thought I'd flag it for prospective essayists out there: $1K Offered for Best Work/Life Essay, $5K for Legal Profession Essay | ABA Journal - Law News Now. Deadlines are Feb. 29 (for the work-life contest) and March 3 (for the legal profession contest).
Do you want to learn more about blogs?
I've updated our library's guide, Blogs & RSS Feeds. It gives you links to directories of law-related blogs, information about using RSS feeds and feed readers, and tips for starting a blog of your own.
I've also posted a new guide listing several dozen law-related blogs by bloggers in Washington State (and one from Vancouver, BC). Check them out -- there might be something there for you, whether you want to follow criminal law, construction law, or Internet law.
Thanks to Seattle Trademark Lawyer, whose blogroll got my list started.
The Federal Judicial Center has an e-discovery guide for judge on its website: Managing Discovery of Electronic Information: A Pocket Guide for Judges (2007). One of the authors is Judge Barbara J. Rothstein (W.D. Wash.), who has been the director of the Federal Judicial Center since 2003.
Thanks: Digestible Law (Perkins Coie).
The Sixth Amendment guarantees criminal defendants the right to a jury trial. We're used to thinking of this as an individual right, but Prof. Laura Appleman (Willamette Law) uses historical sources to show that colonial Americans thought of the right as largely a community right -- the people of the community had a right to be represented on a jury that would decide guilt and determine the sentence. This is more than an interesting historical byway, since the Supreme Court had evoked the history of the Sixth Amendment in its decisions (Apprendi, Blakely) requiring juries to find the facts used in sentencing.
Laura I Appleman, The Lost Meaning of the Jury Trial Right, working draft (January 17, 2008), available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1084960.
If the right is not just the defendant's, we have to wonder how the defendant can waive a jury trial. We take bench trials and plea bargains for granted now, but I was surprised to read that some state supreme courts held that guilty verdicts were unconstitutional because they removed the community's right to decide guilt and punishment. Id. at 49.
Graphic: John Adams (one of the authorities quoted in Appleman's article), from White House Kids.
Michael Atkins at Seattle Trademark Lawyer reports that Judge Coughenour isn't accepting trademark cases when they're assigned to him. Since he's on senior status, he can have more control over his docket apparently. Judge Coughenour Not Accepting New Trademark Cases, Jan. 17, 2008.
I just listened to a podcast interview with two of the authors of The Electronic Evidence and Discovery Handbook: Forms, Checklists and Guidelines, published by the ABA.
Asked what sets this book apart from other books on e-discovery, Sharon Nelson said: forms. She quoted a friend as saying that all lawyers want two things: forms and a continuance. This book has 60 forms (and a CD-ROM to make them easy to work with).
For more about the book, see the publisher's description (the publisher is the ABA) or take a look at it in the library (KF8947 .N45 2006 at Classified Stacks).
How should judges deal with scientific evidence? Prof. Edward K. Cheng says that one way to improve decisionmaking is for them to do library (or online) research themselves. Judges are divided on the question. In a survey Cheng conducted, some said that outside research was highly desirable and others said it was highly undesirable.
This Article has argued that independent research is both desirable and permissible. Indeed, independent research carries great promise as a tool for helping judges decide Daubert questions and for improving scientific decisionmaking in the courts generally. Furthermore, although ultimately ambiguous, current rules seem to allow sufficient leeway to permit the practice. But ultimately, whether one agrees with its position or not, this Article’s true purpose is a broader one, and that is to spark greater academic and judicial commentary on the issue of independent research and the various ways to help judges make scientific admissibility decisions.Edward K. Cheng, Independent Judicial Research in the Daubert Age, 56 Duke L.J. 1263, 1315 (2007), available here.
It used to be common for states to exempt professionals -- doctors, lawyers, clergy, enineers -- from jury service. Now it is common to have them on juries. It's perceived as fair in some ways: everyone has to serve, and juries are more representative. But there's a risk that a professional will sway fellow jurors during deliberations, bringing in outside knowledge -- in effect, giving testimony that is not susceptible to cross-examination or refutation during argument.
For a discussion, see Michael B. Mushlin, Bound and Gagged: The Peculiar Predicament of Professional Jurors, 25 Yale L. & Pol'y Rev. 239 (2007). Prof. Mushlin presents results of a survey of jury consultants, who report that they often see cases where a professional on the jury makes a difference.
He proposes increased challenges for cause -- e.g., if an engineer is in the jury pool for a case involving bridge construction. But, once a professional is on the jury, he proposes that they not be given special instructions not to use their expertise. Restrictive instructions unduly interfere with the deliberative process, he says.
A bill (HB 2945) was introduced yesterday that would provide a private cause of action for the wrongful death or injury of a companion animal. It would add companion animals to RCW 4.24.320, which provides a cause of action (with treble damages) for injuries to livestock.
Photo credit: mah.
Some big businesses have lifted photos from Flickr and blogs to use in their advertising. And some of the photographers and their subjects are not flattered -- in fact, some have sued. Search Help! I've been photonapped by Big Business!, Seattle Times, Jan. 16, 2008 (story from Wash. Post).
McIver's domestic-violence case dropped, Seattle Times, Jan. 16, 2008:
Faced with the prospect of going to trial today with little evidence and without the cooperation of the alleged victim, King County prosecutors on Tuesday dropped the domestic-violence case against Seattle City Councilmember Richard McIver.See also McIver assault charge dropped, Seattle P-I, Jan. 16, 2008. The P-I quotes "David Allen, one of two attorneys representing McIver." I believe the other lawyer is Allen's partner and UW Trial Ad instructor Todd Maybrown.
Yesterday's Washington Post had a front-page story about the use of "monitorships" by federal prosecutors. Ex-Officials Benefit From Corporate Cleanup, Wash. Post, Jan. 15, 2008.
Here's the basic model: a company seems to have engaged in shady practices. The U.S. Attorney's office investigates. At some point, instead of further investigation leading to a possible indictment, the prosecutors work out a deal with the company that the company will pay a a consultant (chosen by the prosecutors) to come inside the company and shake things up.
The lucrative arrangements are known as "monitorships," unusual contracts in which an outsider comes into a troubled company with vast power to expose corruption and change business practices. The deals allow scandal-plagued companies to avoid criminal charges -- and they give prosecutors a way to ensure businesses keep their promises and clean up abuses. But legal experts and lawmakers are expressing growing concern about inconsistency and secrecy surrounding the appointments.The monitors hired -- with big pricetags -- are often former government officials (e.g., former Attorney General John Ashcroft), and there's no competitive bidding process.
Court Upholds NY Judicial Elections, Wash. Post, Jan. 16, 2008. New York voters elect delegates to a party convention. The delegates select judicial candidates. Unsuccessful candidates and a watchdog group challenged the system. "The plaintiffs have said the current system leads to cozy relationships among judges, lawyers and politicians." The district court and the Second Circuit found it unconstitutional. The Supreme Court today reversed.
The case is New York Board of Elections v. Torres, 06-766, supremecourtus.gov. The opinion was by Scalia. There were no dissents (although there were a couple of concurrences).
The standard line is that most judges are generalists, handling any legal dispute that comes before them. Prof. Edward K. Cheng has tested that proposition by examining 10 years of decisions from the U.S. Courts of Appeals. Although panels are assigned randomly, it turns out that some judges tend to write more than their share of opinions in given areas. For example, if Judge A is in the majority in 30 unanimous 3-judge employment discrimination cases, you might expect A to write 10 of the opinions, but in practice A might have written 20.
Edward K. Cheng, The Myth of the Generalist Judge: An Empirical Study of Opinion Specialization in the Federal Courts of Appeals (working paper presented at Fordham Law School Jan. 3, 2008).
Is this a bad thing or a good thing? Prof. Cheng discusses possible implications. One obvious positive: greater expertise by the opinion writer might make for better opinions, prepared more efficiently. One possible negative: other judges might defer too much to the judge who seems to be expert and there might be some bias. To take one example, there are a number of judges who get assigned to more than their share of criminal law cases -- often judges who were prosecutors before being appointed to the bench. (Defense attorneys are much less often appointed.) Would former prosecutors have a bias toward the government position?
Michale Atkins, the author of Seattle Trademark Lawyer, is hosting a get-together for local law bloggers this evening. Should be interesting. For more, see his his post from yesterday.
Anger, denial turn to hope nearly 4 years after tragedy, Seattle Times, Jan. 13, 2008:
It's been nearly four years since a board flew off a rented trailer on Interstate 405, smashed through the windshield of [Maria] Federici's Jeep and sheared off much of her face.See earlier post (May 23, 2007).
Since then, Federici has undergone seven reconstructive surgeries, had a state law making it a crime not to secure loads named in her honor and won a $15.5 million court judgment against U-Haul and the man who failed to tie down the load that struck her car.
She has yet to receive any money because U-Haul has appealed November's jury verdict. But her lawyers expect she will eventually receive enough money to pay her living expenses and medical bills for the rest of her life.
Judge's strict no-hat rule upsets cancer patient, Seattle Times, Jan. 13, 2008 (story from Tri-City Herald). The court is in Benton County.
King County judges get high marks:
Most King County Superior Court judges are doing their jobs skillfully, respectively and impartially, according to the most comprehensive survey ever of attorneys who practice before them.
The results of the survey, conducted by the King County Bar Association and released this week, show that, overall, judges received positive ratings about 90 percent of the time.
Check out the big story in this week's Weekly on DNA exonerations and the state's resistance to some convicts' requests for testing: Rick Anderson, News: New DNA Methods Could Throw More Convictions Into Doubt, Seattle Weekly, Jan. 9, 2008.
Prominent in the article is the UW's Innocence Project Northwest.
The cases discussed are
This morning's Seattle Times has a front-page story about pressure from booters to dismiss UW football coach Ty Willingham and athletic director Todd Turner. There was also some significant support. The story quotes from various email messages the newspaper got from the UW using a public records request.
One booster ("Ed Hansen — lawyer, multimillionaire, University of Washington alumnus and former three-term Everett mayor") pledged "100,000 towards a law school scholarship" conditioned on Willingham's termination and "a second $100,000" conditioned on Turner's termination. The UW decided to retain Willingham, but Turner is leaving at the end of this month. (President Emmert says he doesn't remember seeing the message. He also says he doesn't pay attention to financial threats or inducements tied to personnel decisions.)
Asked about his e-mail to Emmert, Hansen said he never expected it to become public. He said he offered the money because he wanted to help law students and get the football team back to winning.Huskies booster offered $100K for coach's firing, Seattle Times, Jan. 10, 2008.
Hansen said he believed there was nothing inappropriate about his e-mail: "If someone is willing to make a gift of money for a charitable purpose, they are entitled to put conditions on it. The UW is free to do what it will do, and Ed Hansen is free to make contributions to the UW if he likes the direction things are going."
Asked if he planned to donate $100,000 now that Turner has resigned, Hansen said he'd never considered the possibility that Willingham would stay and Turner be gone. "Your call is making me evaluate that," Hansen told a reporter. Later, Hansen said, "I think, as you and I are talking, I will go ahead with the $100,000 I mentioned."
A new law review article uses citation analysis to get a measure of the influence of state supreme courts. Jake Dear & Edward W. Jessen, “Followed Rates” and Leading State Cases, 1940-2005, 41 U.C. Davis L. Rev. 683 (2007).
The California Supreme Court has been seen as an influential court, both in studies and anecdotally. The authors sought to explore that claim, updating and refining the earlier studies. (Mr. Dear is the Chief Supervising Attorney for the California Supreme Court and Mr. Jessen is the Reporter of Decisions.)
With the help of LexisNexis (the owner of Shepard's Citations), they developed a database of cases that had not only been cited by other state courts but followed. Not surprisingly, California was consistently at the top of the list -- most cases that have been followed at least once, most cases that have been followed at least 3 times, most cases followed since 1986, etc.
A new result was that the Washington State Supreme Court was consistently in the number two slot. Older studies had placed New York, New Jersey, or other states higher, but with this data it was Washington. See note 87 of the article for a list of the six Washington cases that have been followed six times or more.
The authors say that the various state supreme courts typically have around the same number of full opinions. A difference, though, is the pool.
California’s highest court certainly has a large and rich inventory of cases from which to select — the court considers approximately 5400 petitions for review and 3000 requests for original writs annually....Id. at 703. Washington, a much smaller state (both in area and population), had 1,576 cases in its pipeline, for which it selected for review and wrote full opinions in 124. Washington Courts, Supreme Court: Court Activity by Source of Review.
A Canadian smelter released pollutants that were carried by the Columbia River into the U.S., past the Colville reservation. In 2004 tribal leaders sued the company for its failure to help pay for clean-up. The latest is that the Supreme Court had denied cert. (06-1188, Teck Cominco Metals, Ltd. v. Pakootas). U.S. high court declines to review Can. company pollution ruling, Seattle P-I, Jan. 7, 2008. Colville tribes can sue Canadian mining firm: Court upholds pollution ruling, Seattle P-I, Jan. 7, 2008.
Michael Robinson-Dorn, director of the UW's Berman Environmental Law Clinic, is quoted in U.S. Supreme Court expected to make decision on Teck Cominco case soon, Canadian Press, Dec. 30, 2007.
Feds open criminal inquiry into port, Seattle P-I, Jan. 7, 2008:
The U.S. Attorney for Western Washington is conducting a criminal investigation of the Port of Seattle based on a state performance audit of the port's construction management, which found the port wasted $97.2 million during contracts active from 2004 to 2007.
In a letter sent Friday to Washington state Auditor Brian Sonntag, U.S. Attorney Jeffrey Sullivan asked the auditor not disclose the identities of the people who were interviewed for at least three months because such disclosure "may well impede our criminal investigation."
Suspects could face life in prison in pot killings, Seattle P-I, Jan. 8, 2008. Snohomish County prosecutor Janice Ellis decided not to seek the death penalty.
Carnation killing suspects won't wear shackles in court, Seattle P-I, Jan. 8, 2008:
Two people charged with killing six members of a family in rural Carnation on Christmas Eve made their first formal court appearance Tuesday as attorneys argued over whether they should wear jail uniforms and shackles in court.Judge Cheryl Carey granted the defendants' request that they be allowed to wear street clothes (and denied the jail's request that they be kept shackled and in jail clothes to deter escape). The judge said that press could photograph the defendants, but only once they're in street clothes.
John Trasviña, President and General Counsel of the Mexican-American Legal Defense & Educational Fund, will speak on The Rollback of The Civil Rights Era in America as part of the Gates Public Service Speaker Series.
January 25, 2008 (Friday) 12:30 PM - 2:00 PM
Location: UW School of Law Room 133
Panel members will be asked to discuss various U.S. Supreme Court decisions (and policy implications of these decisions) that have served to roll back the civil rights of people of color across the country in the areas of workers rights and access to education. There will also be a discussion regarding the wave of passage of anti-immigrant laws across the country through state legislatures and city ordinances
Panel Members:
John Trasviña, President and General Counsel, Mexican-American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF)
Luis R. Fraga, formerly a professor of Political Science at Stanford University and now Associate Vice Provost for Faculty Advancement, Office of Minority Affairs and Office of the Provost here at the UW
Pramila Jayapal Executive Director, Hate Free Zone Washington
Cristóbal Joshua Alex, National Campaign to Restore Civil Rights
The event is free and open to the public.
What influences a lawyer’s decision to take a med mal case? Obviously there has to be an adverse outcome, but what else makes the potential client’s situation seem like a good case?
Two lawyers who represent defendants examine this topic in an article aimed at medical professionals, to help them avoid making themselves into attractive defendants. James W. Saxton & Maggie M. Finkelstein, How a Successful Litigator Decides Whether or Not to Sue You, Medical Practice Management, Sept.-Oct. 2007, at 90.
Lawyers will look at how to use the presence or absence of documentation, communand the plus factor as well as witness credibility. Your documentation, communication, and service are your evidence that can support your care but also prevent attorneys from taking on cases with bad outcomes. It is time for medical practices to significantly change their liability equation, and fortunately they can [by adopting the strategies discussed in this article]. In addition, these strategies are also good for patient care.Id. at 93.
Justice Debra L. Stephens will be sworn in on Monday, Jan. 7. She is to serve the last year of the term vacated by Justice Bobbe Bridge. Washington Courts Press Release, Jan. 4, 2008.
For years, people were called to jury service int he county and assigned to either the Regional Justice Center in Kent or the King County Courthouse in downtown Seattle randomly. That made for big transportation hassles for jurors who had to cross the county. This fall the courts tried out a new system, sending jurors from south of I-90 to the RJC and jurors from north of I-90 downtown. A couple of judges upheld the system over challenges, but this week Superior Court Judge Cheryl Carey, "in a strongly worded opinion," said the system violates the state constitution's requirement that guarantees trial by "an impartial jury of the county in which the offense is charged to have been committed." Jury verdicts in question, Seattle Times, Jan. 6, 2008.
The constitutional provision quoted is in Art. I sec. 22 of the Washington State Constitution.
The court rule challenged is King County Local General Rule 18, effective Sept. 1, 2007. LGR implements RCW 2.36.055, enacted in 2005.
