HOUSE BILL REPORT

SSB 5277

This analysis was prepared by non-partisan legislative staff for the use of legislative members in their deliberations. This analysis is not a part of the legislation nor does it constitute a statement of legislative intent.

As Passed House:

April 6, 2017

Title: An act relating to disqualification of judges.

Brief Description: Concerning disqualification of judges.

Sponsors: Senate Committee on Law & Justice (originally sponsored by Senators Padden, Pedersen, Darneille and Kuderer).

Brief History:

Committee Activity:

Judiciary: 3/22/17, 3/23/17 [DP].

Floor Activity:

Passed House: 4/6/17, 96-0.

Brief Summary of Substitute Bill

  • Changes the terminology relating to disqualification of judges.

  • Changes some of the rules governing the process of disqualification.

HOUSE COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY

Majority Report: Do pass. Signed by 13 members: Representatives Jinkins, Chair; Kilduff, Vice Chair; Rodne, Ranking Minority Member; Muri, Assistant Ranking Minority Member; Frame, Goodman, Graves, Haler, Hansen, Kirby, Klippert, Orwall and Shea.

Staff: Audrey Frey (786-7289).

Background:

If a person who is a party or attorney in an action or proceeding in superior court believes that he or she cannot have a fair and impartial trial before the superior court judge assigned to the case, the person can file a motion and affidavit of prejudice to establish that the judge should be disqualified.

A judge who has been disqualified is prohibited from hearing the case, and the case will be transferred to another judge from a different department in the same court, a visiting judge, or another court.

The rules governing the process of disqualification are as follows:

Summary of Bill:

All references to a motion and affidavit of prejudice are replaced with references to a notice of disqualification.

The rules governing the process of disqualification are rephrased, and the following substantive changes are made:

Appropriation: None.

Fiscal Note: Not requested.

Effective Date: The bill takes effect 90 days after adjournment of the session in which the bill is passed.

Staff Summary of Public Testimony:

(In support) This bill is going to make a real difference for small counties. In counties where there is only one judge, if the judge is disqualified through an affidavit of prejudice, it can really gum up the calendar because the judge cannot hear that one case, and another judge has to come in. For ministerial matters, such as an agreed trial continuance, this bill affords lawyers more of an opportunity to disqualify a particular judge.

This bill also clarifies what acts amount to disqualification and changes the name from "affidavit of prejudice" to "notice of disqualification." In order to disqualify a judge, lawyers often have to sign a declaration that says Judge A or B is prejudiced against the client. That can put lawyers in a tough spot because the lawyer often does not know the judge and may be swearing to something that might not be true. So, changing the name is another good step.

(Opposed) None.

Persons Testifying: Sean O'Donnell and Tom Parker, Superior Court Judges Association.

Persons Signed In To Testify But Not Testifying: None.