Archived Version: August 19, 2008

Click to exit archives
An information resource for Washington voters


 

Home

Show My Elections

Supreme Court

Court of Appeals

Ratings and Endorsements

Media Stories

Candidates A-Z

Judges A-Z

Around the Nation

Voting for Judges: FAQ

Sponsors

Election Archives

 

Washington Women Lawyers

Ratings

 
 

2008 Ratings for Judicial Candidates
 

The goals of the Washington Women Lawyers (WWL) evaluation are:

1) To sustain and strengthen the judiciary through the appointment and election of excellent judicial candidates; and

2) To encourage qualified candidates, sensitive to women’s issues both within the profession and under the law, to seek and obtain positions of responsibility and stature within the legal profession and community in general.

WWL provides a rating for a judicial candidate for election or appointment to an open position as exceptionally well qualified, well qualified, qualified, unqualified, or not rated.  The ratings are good for two years. 

Additional information can be obtained by contacting the current Chair of WWL's statewide Judicial Evaluation Committee:  Marcia M. Meade

 

Name Court Rating
Susan Amini King
Superior
Qualified
George Appel Snohomish
Superior
Well Qualified
Jim Beecher Supreme Court Exceptionally Well Qualified
Tim Bradshaw King
Superior
Highly Qualified
Regina Cahan King
Superior
Exceptionally Well Qualified
Nic Corning King
Superior
Exceptionally Well Qualified
Jeanette Dalton Kitsap
Superior
Well Qualified
Ann Danieli King
Superior
Highly Qualified
David Elofson Yakima
Superior
Exceptionally Well Qualified
Mary Fairhurst Supreme Court Exceptionally Well Qualified
Julia Garratt King
Superior
Exceptionally Well Qualified
Randall Gaylord San Juan
Superior
Exceptionally Well Qualified
Rebeccah Graham King
Superior
Highly Qualified
Holly Hill King
Superior
Highly Qualified
Robin Hunt Court of Appeals
Division II
Exceptionally Well Qualified
James Johanson Snohomish
Superior
Unqualified
Charles Johnson Supreme Court Exceptionally Well Qualified
Kevin Korsmo Court of Appeals
Division III
Exceptionally Well Qualified
Robert Lawrence-Berrey Yakima
Superior
Well Qualified
John Linde San Juan
Superior
Exceptionally Well Qualified
Eric Lucas Snohomish
Superior
Unqualified
Barbara Mack King
Superior
Highly Qualified
Salvador Mendoza Benton-Franklin
Superior
Well Qualified
Suzanne Parisien King
Superior
Not Qualified
Annette Plese Spokane
Superior
Well Qualified
Les Ponomarchuk King
Superior
Exceptionally Well Qualified
Jerri Potts Benton-Franklin
Superior
Well Qualified
Jean Rietschel King
Superior
Exceptionally Well Qualified
Douglas Shepherd Whatcom
Superior
Well Qualified
Charles Snyder Whatcom
Superior
Well Qualified
Marianne Spearman King
Superior
[pending]
Debra Stephens Supreme Court Exceptionally Well Qualified
Robert Thompson Benton-Franklin
Superior
Qualified
Linda Tompkins Spokane
Superior
Exceptionally Well Qualified
Vic VanderSchoor Benton-Franklin
Superior
Qualified
Greg Wall Kitsap
Superior
Well Qualified

 

WWL’s Criteria for Judicial Ratings

Washington Women Lawyers uses the following criteria for rating candidates for judicial office:

A. No Rating.  A candidate shall be given no rating:

1. If insufficient information is available for Committee evaluation at the time the candidate is being considered for rating, or

2. If the candidate has not made timely application for a rating, including timely submission of materials requested by the Committee, or

3. If the candidate has served as a member of the WWL Evaluation Committee or parallel chapter committee within one year of application for rating.

B. Unqualified.  A candidate shall be rated unqualified if:

1. Candidate is not a member in good standing of the Washington State Bar or not a member in good standing of any other state’s Bar Association to which he or she has been admitted, or

2. Candidate is currently a member of the judiciary and, during his or her current term of office, has been reprimanded or disciplined by the State Judicial Conduct Commission, or

3. Candidate has failed to meet the mandatory criteria for a Qualified rating.

C. Qualified.  Candidate must possess the following attributes:

1. Candidate is a member in good standing of the Washington State Bar and every Bar in which the candidate is an active member.

2. Candidate has a reputation for integrity, good character, courtesy, common sense, and respect for all persons.

3. Candidate demonstrates respect for the law, for the judicial process, and for the dignity of the court.

4. Candidate is fair and has a reputation for fairness and freedom from bias against any group or class of citizens.

5. Candidate possesses the ability to make difficult decisions under the stress.

6. Candidate has good legal ability and good writing skills.

7. Candidate has the temperament and courtroom practice appropriate to the judicial position for which the candidate is being considered.

8. Candidate has the ability to communicate clearly and effectively with attorneys, litigants, and other participants in the courtroom.

9. Candidate has the ability to command respect from the attorneys, litigants, and other participants in the courtroom, and has the energy and capacity for hard work.

If the Candidate seeks a trial court position:

10. Candidate has the ability to manage pretrial and trial proceedings.  This includes the ability to weigh conflicting testimony, to make factual determinations, to handle a wide variety of issues and situations likely to be presented at court, and the ability to handle the demands of trial and motions calendars.

C. Well Qualified.  Candidate shall meet the criteria for “qualified” and must have the following:

1. Candidate has demonstrated a commitment to equal justice under the law and is sensitive to issues important to women both within the profession and under the law.  Such commitment and sensitivity may be evidenced by the candidate’s courtroom practice, personal and professional background, professional and community activities including pro bono work, professional employment practices, mentoring and other support of women in the profession, or advocacy of legal issues important to women, including active participation in efforts to protect the rights of minorities.

2. Candidate either has judicial experience or experience as a neutral decision-maker or a demonstrated commitment to serving in the role of neutral decision-maker.

D. Exceptionally Well Qualified.  Candidate shall meet the criteria for “qualified” and for “well qualified” and must have the following:

1. Excellent legal ability and writing skills, which may be evidenced by excellent legal analysis and an excellent ability to deal with legal problems, by proven legal scholarship and writing, or by a reputation for excellence in legal work and practice.

2. Candidate has demonstrated exceptional litigation, judicial or administrative experience.  Candidate also has a reputation for outstanding personal and professional integrity, personal and professional independence, personal courage, and an excellent ability to make difficult decisions in demanding situations.

3. Candidate has consistently demonstrated commitment to equality and to access to justice.

Candidate shall have demonstrated some or all of the following:

1. Significant public service.

2. Potential for leadership on the bench.

3. An interest in and commitment to working with other judges and court administrators to improve the administration of justice.

 


 
   
 

VotingforJudges.org, P.O. Box 1460, Silverdale, WA  98383
Write to comments@votingforjudges.org.

As the election approaches, Votingforjudges.org will include ratings and endorsements from numerous organizations. We provide this information so that voters will be better informed about the candidates. We do not rate or endorse any candidates; the ratings and endorsements of organizations included at this site reflect the views of those individual organizations and not necessarily the views of votingforjudges.org or its sponsors.