HOUSE BILL REPORT

                  HB 2775

                      As Passed House:

                      February 8, 2000

Title:  An act relating to the transfer of cases from commissioners to judges.

Brief Description:  Clarifying requirements for the transfer of cases from commissioners to judges.

Sponsors:  Representatives Lambert, Constantine, Carrell, Hurst, Lantz and Cox.

Brief History:

  Committee Activity:

Judiciary:  2/3/00 [DP].

Floor Activity:

Passed House:  2/8/00, 97-0.

                 Brief Summary of Bill

$Requires that a party's motion to transfer a case from a court commissioner to a judge must be filed before the commissioner has made any discretionary ruling in the case.

HOUSE COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY

Majority Report:  Do pass.  Signed by 12 members:  Representatives Carrell, Republican Co-Chair; Constantine, Democratic Co-Chair; Hurst, Democratic Vice Chair; Lambert, Republican Vice Chair; Cox; Dickerson; Esser; Kastama; Lantz; Lovick; McDonald and Schindler.

Staff:  Bill Perry (786-7123).

Background:

District Court Commissioners.  Judges of district courts are authorized to appoint one or more court commissioners to assist in conducting judicial business.  A district court commissioner must be a registered voter in the county and must either have passed the state bar exam or the qualifying exam for lay judges.

A district court commissioner has as much of a judge's authority as the appointing judge prescribes.

Transferring a Case from a Commissioner to a Judge.  When a case is being heard by a commissioner, any party may have the case transferred to a judge.  There is no explicit limit on when a demand to transfer the case may be made.

Transferring a Case from one Judge to another Judge.  When a case is being heard by a judge, any party may have the case transferred by filing an affidavit of prejudice.  However, the demand to transfer must be filed before the judge has made any order or ruling involving "discretion."  There is no statutory definition of a "discretionary ruling," but there are many court decisions suggesting that a ruling is discretionary if the judge has the authority to grant or deny a party's motion.  Certain judicial actions are specifically listed in the affidavit of prejudice statute, however, as not being discretionary rulings.  These listed rulings do not, therefore, cut off the right to demand a transfer to a different judge.  The listed rulings that are not "discretionary" include:

Carrangement of the calendar;

Csetting of an action, motion, or proceeding down for hearing or trial;

Carraignment of the accused in a criminal action; or

Cfixing bail.

Summary of Bill:

A motion to transfer a case from a district court commissioner to a judge must be filed before any discretionary ruling is made.  The same rulings that are not considered discretionary for purposes of transferring a case from one judge to another are not considered discretionary for purposes of transferring a case from a commissioner to a judge.

Appropriation:  None.

Fiscal Note:  Not requested.

Effective Date:  Ninety days after adjournment of session in which bill is passed.

Testimony For:  The bill will prevent forum shopping and reduce unnecessary delays and inefficiencies in scheduling and hearing cases.

Testimony Against:  None.

Testified:  Brett Buckley and Judge Peter Lukevich, District and Municipal Court Judges Association.