WSR 19-23-019
RULES OF COURT
STATE SUPREME COURT
[November 6, 2019]
IN THE MATTER OF THE SUGGESTED AMENDMENT TO MAR 7.2—PROCEDURE AFTER REQUEST FOR TRIAL DE NOVO
)
)
)
)
ORDER
NO. 25700-A-1269
The Washington State Association of County Clerks, having recommended the suggested amendment to MAR 7.2—Procedure After Request for Trial de Novo, and the Court having approved the suggested amendment for publication;
Now, therefore, it is hereby
ordered:
(a) That pursuant to the provisions of GR 9(g), the suggested amendment as shown below is to be published for comment in the Washington Reports, Washington Register, Washington State Bar Association and Administrative Office of the Court's websites in January 2020.
(b) The purpose statement as required by GR 9(e), is published solely for the information of the Bench, Bar and other interested parties.
(c) Comments are to be submitted to the Clerk of the Supreme Court by either U.S. Mail or Internet E-Mail by no later than April 30, 2020. Comments may be sent to the following addresses: P.O. Box 40929, Olympia, Washington 98504-0929, or supreme@courts.wa.gov. Comments submitted by e-mail message must be limited to 1500 words.
dated at Olympia, Washington this 6th day of November, 2019.
 
For the Court
 
 
 
Fairhurst, C.J.
 
CHIEF JUSTICE
GR 9 Cover Sheet Regarding Suggested change to MAR 7.2
January 2019
(A) Name of Proponent:
Washington State Association of County Clerks (WSACC)
(B) Spokesperson—a designation of the person who is knowledgeable about the proposed rule and who can provide additional information:
Barbara Miner, King County
Clerk 206-477-0777
Barbara.miner@kingcounty.gov
(C) Purpose:
The intent of this suggested language is to make it clear that judicial officers are barred from viewing the results of the arbitration during the pendency of the de novo process. Current rule language simply instructs the clerk to seal the award, however, judicial officers are usually able to access all sealed documents of their court. This change also dictates the unsealing of the award at the conclusion of the de novo or the conclusion of the case.
(D) Hearing. No hearing is requested or necessary.
(E) Expedited Consideration. Expedited consideration is not requested.
(F) Supporting Materials:
-Proposed language
-Previous correspondence with the Supreme Court about this proposed change
-SCJA Response to proposal
MAR 7.2
PROCEDURE AFTER REQUEST FOR TRIAL DE NOVO
(a) Sealing. The clerk shall seal any arbitration award if a trial de novo is requested. Such sealing shall prohibit judicial officers' access to the award until the trial de novo is completed or the case is otherwise completed, at which time the clerk shall unseal the award.
(b) No Reference to Arbitration; Use of Testimony.
(1) The trial de novo shall be conducted as though no arbitration proceeding had occurred. No reference shall be made to the arbitration award, in any pleading, brief, or other written or oral statement to the trial court or jury either before or during the trial, nor, in a jury trial, shall the jury be informed that there has been an arbitration proceeding.