S p r i n g 2 0 12 - I n T h i s I s s u e
Meet the Judiciary
4
WDTL IME CLE
Don’t be This Lawyer
6
2011: Medical
Malpractice Year
in Review
10
WDTL Officers
18
WDTL Membership
19
DEFENSENEWS
Betts Patterson Mines Adds
Three New Attorneys 7
12
Current Events
20
Fighting for Justice and Balance in Civil Courts • www.wdtl.org
Subjective, Objective, or Both?
By Charles N. Brooks, MD, Orthopaedic Surgeon
The terms subjective and objective
e.g., “ow, that hurts!” However, tenderness
utilized in the past to diagnosis diabetes
are frequently mentioned in healthcare
may also be manifested in nonverbal pain
mellitus based on the presence of sugar in a
records, but almost as frequently misun-
behavior such as grimacing, wincing, or
patient’s urine.
derstood and misused. For example, at-
withdrawal. A patient unable to perceive
torneys have asked me about “subjective
pain and respond, e.g., when anesthetized,
symptoms” and “objective complaints.”
will not have tenderness.
However, the former is an inherent redundancy, since all symptoms are subjective.
The latter is an oxymoron. Complaints are
never objective, but by definition subjective. The chart notes of physicians, chiropractors, and other healthcare providers are commonly written using a SOAP
format, the acronym standing for subjective, objective, assessment, and plan.
However, as described in greater detail
below, physical findings recorded in the
O section are more often subjective than
objective. Despite this, many caregivers
erroneously maintain all physical findings
are objective.
In healthcare disciplines, whether medicine,
chiropractic, naturopathy, osteopathy, or
“Muscle spasm is an
objective finding not
subject to patient report
or modification; but
spasm is over-reported
by healthcare providers
who mistake normal
or increased muscle
tone for it.”
Some subjective complaints, most commonly pain, may be quantified by a patient,
for instance, on a 0 to 10 scale. However,
many objective abnormalities can be measured, for instance, a patient’s temperature,
body weight, or blood pressure, the length
of a scar or circumference of an atrophied
forearm, or the difference in lower limb
lengths. In addition to these physical findings, those of diagnostic studies such as lab
tests, x-rays, and electrodiagnostic studies
are objective.
Some physical findings fall into a gray area,
being both subjective and objective whenever less than normal. For example, when
asked to touch his chin to his chest a man
demonstrates 25 degrees of cervical flexion
(normal being 50 degrees). An examiner
can see and measure the 25 degrees of
An objective abnormality, on the other hand,
motion, but does not know whether the
can be perceived by an examiner utiliz-
individual could have achieved 30, 40, or 50
ing one or more senses without patient
degrees of flexion had he exerted greater
input. For instance, one might see a scar
effort. Strength measurements also fall into
or limb deformity, hear a heart murmur or
this “both” category. A woman who exerts
joint crepitus, smell alcohol on a patient’s
30 kg of force when gripping a dynamom-
breath or the sweet odor of Pseudomonas
eter with left hand but only 10 kg on her
However, most physical findings are also
aeruginosa, or feel a subcutaneous mass
dominant right might have true weakness
subjective. For example, tenderness, i.e.,
or the warmth of inflammation. Although
or be exerting suboptimal effort. Repeated
pain on palpation, depends entirely on input
not currently employed, even taste was
otherwise, subjective refers to that which
is reported or demonstrated by a patient
but cannot be independently perceived by
an examiner. This most commonly means
symptoms such as pain, numbness, tingling, indigestion, depression, or stress.
from the patient. The input is usually verbal,
Continued on Page 5
DEFENSENEWS
Aric Newlon
206.973.3751
PO Box 12645
Seattle, WA 98111
[email protected]
Editors
Erin H. Hammond
253.237.0587
P.O. Box 23251
Federal Way, WA 98093
[email protected]
Editorial Board
William L. Cameron
Lee Smart, P.S., Inc.
206.262.8301
1800 One Convention Place
701 Pike Street
Seattle, WA 98101-3929
[email protected]
Michelle Menely
Gordon Thomas Honeywell LLP
206.676.7532
Suite 2100, 600 University St
Seattle, WA 98101-1176
[email protected]
Holly E. Hinterberger
Watt Tieder Hoffar & Fitzgerald
206.204.5800
Suite 2210, 1215 Fourth Ave.
Seattle, WA 98161
[email protected]
Aaron Paul Riensche
Ogden Murphy Wallace PLLC
206.447.7000
Ste 2100, 1601 5th Ave
Seattle, WA 98101-1686
[email protected]
Carol Sue Janes
Bennett Bigelow Leedom, P.S.
206.622.5511
Suite 1900, 1700 Seventh Ave
Seattle, WA 98101
[email protected]
Melissa Kay Roeder
Forsberg & Umlauf
206.689.8500
Suite 1400, 901 5th Ave
Seattle, WA 98164-2050
[email protected]
Laurie D. Kohli
Porter, Kohli & LeMaster, P.S.
206.682.0224
Suite 2200, 1601 Fifth Ave
Seattle, WA 98101-2622
[email protected]
Michael H. Runyan
Lane Powell PC
206.223.7062
Suite 4100, 1420 Fifth Ave.
Seattle, WA 98101-2338
[email protected]
Margaret Sundberg
206.595.1813
P.O. Box 99583
Seattle, WA 98139-0583
[email protected]
Katrina Elsa Mulligan
Stafford Frey Cooper PC
Nathan L. Furman
206.623.9900
Forsberg & Umlauf, P.S.
Ste 3100, 601 Union St
206.346.3951
Seattle, WA 98101-1374
Ste 1400, 901 Fifth Ave
[email protected]
Seattle, WA 98164
[email protected]
Aric Bradford Newlon
206.973.3751
Karim A. Hamir
PO Box 12645
778.996.7508
Seattle, WA 98111
2nd Flr, 1789 Lonsdale Ave
[email protected]
N. Vancouver, BC V7M2J6
[email protected]
Michael Kazuo Rhodes
Erin H. Hammond Barrett & Worden, P.S.
206.436.2020
253.237.0587
Ste 700, 2101 4th Ave
P.O. Box 23251
Seattle, WA 98121
Federal Way, WA 98093
[email protected]
[email protected]
A. Grant Lingg
Forsberg & Umlauf, P.S.
206.689.8500
Suite 1400, 901 Fifth Ave
Seattle, WA 98164-1039
[email protected]
Bert W. Markovich
Schwabe Williamson & Wyatt, P.C.
206.622.1711
Suite 3010, 1420 5th Ave
Seattle, WA 98101-3944
[email protected]
Lydia A. Zakhari
Carney Badley Spellman, P.S.
206.622.8020
Ste 3600, 701 Fifth Ave
Seattle, WA 98104-7011
[email protected]
The Defense News is published bi-monthly by the Washington Defense Trial
Lawyers, c/o WDTL, 800 5th Ave., Suite 4141, Seattle, WA 98104. All rights
reserved. Reproduction of any material appearing herein without permission
is prohibited. SUBSCRIPTION: Included in dues of all active members.
EDITORIAL POLICY: Defense News is edited for members of the Washington
Defense Trial Lawyers. Publishing and editorial decisions are based on the
editors’ judgment of the quality of the writing, the timeliness of the article,
and the potential interest to Defense News readers. The views expressed in the
Defense News are those of the authors and may not reflect the official policy or
position of WDTL or Defense News. SUBMISSIONS: All submissions must
be typewritten, double-spaced (including citations). Include with the article
an electronic format – either by email or disk. Articles may be submitted to
[email protected] or [email protected]. ADVERTISING: All
advertising inquiries should be directed to: Kristin Baldwin, 800 5th Ave.,
Suite 4141, Seattle, WA 98104, (206) 749-0319 or e-mail: [email protected]
Defense News does not screen its advertisers/advertisements and does not vouch for
the quality of the services offered for sale herein.
2
Spring 2012
WDTL STAFF
Member Services
David Penrose
4141 Agate Road
Bellingham WA 98226-8745
Phone: (206) 529-4128
Fax: (206) 202-3776
Email: [email protected]
Accounting
Stephanie Ray Solum
2144 Westlake Ave N Suite F
Seattle WA 98109
Phone: (206) 551-6288
Email: [email protected]
Executive Director
Kristin Baldwin
800 Fifth Ave., Suite 4141
Seattle WA 98104
Phone: (206) 749-0319
Fax: (206) 260-2798
Email: [email protected]
Spring 2012
3
Meet the Judiciary: The Honorable Tari Eitzen
By Dan Johnson, Law Offices of Shahin Karim
By Erin H. Hammond
the flight attendants. My kids asked me
improve the administration of justice, fa-
in the morning if I was coming home that
cilitate judicial education toward the ends
night. My email box got so full it shut
of efficiency and excellence, support and
down. And to my amazement, attorneys
implement the cannons of ethics, encour-
did not complain about my hearing their
age cooperation and interchange among
summary judgment motions at 7:30 am on
judges, to follow the laws as they relate
the days I was in Spokane!
to the judicial community, and promote
And yes, there was a lot to do in addition
better relations with the public and the
to lobbying for sufficient judicial resources. There are 188 Superior Court Judges
in Washington, in 39 counties making up
36 judicial districts. Each court has its
other branches of government. And yes, a
significant part of our work is advocating
for sufficient funding for the trial courts,
especially now that our trial courts are cut
own unique budgeting, rule making, and
to the bare bone.
calendaring systems and personality.
SCJA tracks legislation that affects the
Some counties have one Superior Court
courts in any way, and works toward
Judge, and King County has fifty-three.
equality and fairness in how the court
The Honorable Tari Eitzen has been a Spo-
There were 298,995 cases filed in Supe-
serves the legal community and our citi-
kane County Superior Court Judge since
rior Courts in the state of Washington in
zenry. We are also involved in rule-making,
1994, after serving as a faculty member
2010. The charge of the Washington State
statute-drafting and policy issues. The
at Gonzaga Law School. From 2003 to
Superior Court Judges Association is to
2010 she taught an undergraduate class
for Gongaza University on The American
Criminal Justice System. Judge Eitzen
served as President of the Washington
State Superior Court Judges’ Association
for 2009-2010. She served two terms on
the Washington State Sentencing Guidelines Commission and is past chair of the
SCJA Ethics Committee.
Judge Eitzen has kindly agreed to answer
some questions for the WDTL Membership:
(1) During your presidency how
much of your time was spent working with the Superior Court Judges’
Association? Did you have time to
do anything other than lobby against
judicial cutbacks?
Being President of SCJA is a three year
commitment: President-Elect, President
and Immediate Past-President. These
three offices compose the SCJA Executive Committee. So, for three years, it
felt like I had two full-time jobs. I flew
from Spokane to SeaTac so often I made
friends with the other frequent fliers and
4
Spring 2012
Continued on Page 8
Subjective From Page 1
measurements of motion and strength,
are objective. Some physical findings,
Dr. Brooks is an expert orthopedic surgeon
e.g., three tests at different times during
such as strength and range of motion, are
who may be contacted through WDTL Core
the physical examination, can be used to
both subjective and objective. While it is
Sponsor Physician Direct Services, Inc. at
assess the validity of effort. Reproducible
important to take into account subjective
(866) 737-1331.
measurements, i.e., the same or similar
evidence, it is also wise to lend greater
results on all three trials, suggest full effort
weight to objective evidence, particularly
and vice versa.
in a medicolegal context.
Muscle spasm is an objective finding not
1 Cocchiarella L and Andersson GBJ (eds.):
Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent
Impairment, Fifth Edition. American Medical
Association, 2001, p. 495.
subject to patient report or modification;
but spasm is over-reported by healthcare
providers who mistake normal or increased
muscle tone for it. True spasm is an involuntary, strong, and sustained contraction
of a muscle or muscle group in response
to an acute injury or other painful stimulus,
designed to splint or immobilize the body
part. Spasm may last for minutes or hours,
but does not continue for weeks, months, or
years. Reports of spasm at such temporally remote times, barring recurrent injury,
should be met with suspicion. Recall that
the purpose of spasm is to immobilize a
body part. Hence, for example, one should
be skeptical about reports of neck or back
spasm in a patient having more than 10 or
20 degrees of spinal motion in any direction.
A prudent healthcare provider listens attentively to a patient’s symptoms and carefully
notes subjective physical findings because
objective physical, radiographic, electrodiagnostic, or other findings may not always
be present, even when there is physical
pathology. For example, 5% of persons
with carpal tunnel syndrome may have normal electrodiagnostic tests.1 On the other
hand, particularly in the setting of a workers’
compensation or personal injury claim, it is
generally advisable to lend greater weight to
objective findings than subjective complaints since the latter may be influenced
by psychosocial problems, poor memory,
financial incentives, and other factors.
In summary, symptoms and most physical
findings are subjective. Diagnostic study
results and a minority of physical findings
Spring 2012
5
Don’t Be This Lawyer:
“When there is apparently dispositive precedent, an appellant may urge its overruling or
distinguishing or reserve a challenge to it for a petition for certiorari but may not simply ignore it.
We don’t know the thinking that led the appellants’ counsel in these two cases to do that. …maybe
appellants think that if they ignore our precedents their appeals will not be assigned to the same
panel as decided the cases that established the precedents. Whatever the reason, such advocacy
is unacceptable.
The ostrich is a noble animal, but not a proper model for an appellate advocate. (Not that
ostriches really bury their heads in the sand when threatened; don’t be fooled by the picture
below.) The ‘ostrich-like tactic of pretending that potentially dispositive authority against a litigant’s
contention does not exist is as unprofessional as it is pointless.’ Mannheim Video, Inc. v. County
of Cook, 884 F.2d 1043, 1047 (7th Cir. 1989), quoting Hill v. Norfolk & Western Ry., 814 F.2d 1192,
1198 (7th Cir. 1987).”
Gonzalez-Servin v. Ford Motor Co., 662 F.3d 931 (7th Cir. 2011) (Posner, J.)
(pictures in the original).
6
Spring 2012
Betts Patterson Mines Adds Three New Attorneys
Betts, Patterson & Mines, P.S. announced today that three new attorneys have joined the firm’s insurance coverage practice group.
Sarah M. Shields has joined the firm
Kymberly R. Sonderman has
as Of Counsel. Ms. Shields advises and
joined the firm as Of Counsel.
defends insurers in third party cover-
Ms. Sonderman’s practice encompass-
age, environmental issues, mass torts
es all areas of personal and commercial
and bad faith matters. She has extensive
lines property and casualty coverage,
experience with research and writing
including first and third party cover-
in insurance coverage and appellate
age, duty to defend, extra contractual
practice, with a specialty in legal theory
claims/bad faith, additional insured
and litigation strategy. Ms. Shields’ previ-
issues, and umbrella/excess cover-
ous experience includes brokering the largest asbestos insur-
age. She also has significant experience in construction defect
ance settlement in the country, as well as numerous nationwide
matters. Ms. Sonderman earned her J.D. from Golden Gate
appeals involving jurisdictional issues, insurance coverage, bad
University School of Law.
faith, mass torts and product liability. Ms. Shields earned her
“We are pleased to have attorneys of this caliber join our
J.D. from the Stanford University Law School.
team and are excited about their ability to help provide and
implement high quality legal solutions for Betts Patterson &
Kelly A. Croll has joined the firm as a
Mines’ clients,” commented Managing Shareholder,
litigation attorney. Ms. Croll focuses her
Larry Gottlieb.
practice on advising insurance companies
regarding coverage and bad faith litigation.
Her broad experience in insurance matters
includes work on general liability, direc-
The attorneys of Betts Patterson & Mines, P.S. are sought out
for their problem-solving skills and for their expertise in serving
the legal needs of both large and small businesses, as well as
individuals. For more information, please call (206) 292-9988
tors and officers, errors and omissions,
commercial and excess/umbrella policies.
or visit www.bpmlaw.com.
After law school, Ms. Croll was Counsel for
Adjudication for the Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission for the Supreme Court of the State of Illinois. This position was
analogous to an appellate clerkship. Ms. Croll earned her J.D. from
DePaul University School of Law in Chicago.
50th Anniversary Celebration at the Space Needle
WDTL Past
President Jeff Frank,
Steve Jager & WDTL
Past President &
Judge Ron Leighton
share a laugh.
Kelly Sweeney,
Jay Jenkins &
Virgil Sweeney
pose prettily for
the camera.
Former Executive
Director Nora Tabler
greets Mark & Lynn
Johnson.
Dan Johnson
gets his bid
in during the
silent auction.
Spring 2012
7
Meet the Judiciary From Page 4
President is, as the saying goes, “where
(3) Do you think the court system
has incorporated some of the finer
the buck stops.” The President is the face
is working or do you believe the
attributes of the inquisitorial system
of the SCJA with the WSBA, the legisla-
civil or criminal justice system is
(courts taking on an active oversight of
ture, DOC, DASA, the Governor’s Office,
breaking down?
discovery and investigation). This evolu-
the public …(well, you get the picture).
I think it is interesting that some who
tion/hybridization is more recently hap-
Being President was a humbling experi-
harshly criticize our legal system are also
pening at a historically rapid rate, and
ence and I took it seriously. I loved it.
the most vocal in proclaiming the U.S.
these are exciting times.
I have one carry-over project from my
presidency: statewide Family Law Civil
Rules. I never guessed going into this it
would be a topic that many people are
passionate about (pro and con). It has
been interesting and not so comfortable
trying to navigate a consensus. I also
continue on the legislative committee, and
I think I just volunteered for another committee. (I hope my husband doesn’t read
this before I tell him).
(2) What is your vision for the future
of our judicial system? What changes
would you advocate and why?
Prior to 2005, the State was contributing
only .3% (that’s 3/10th of 1%) of the costs
of the entire third branch of government
(that included all funding for the Supreme
Court, AOC, law library, judicial conduct
commission, and superior court judges’
salaries)! Between the years of 2005
system the best in the world. It is easy
to become disillusioned, particularly for
people who don’t really deal with the
actual system but get their information
from sound bites, headlines, and court TV.
My faith and perspective was invigorated
when I taught Comparative Criminal Procedure for Gonzaga Law School in Italy
in 2005. Contrary to popular belief, there
are a number of justice systems around
the world that work quite well (many are
hybrids at this point). Most non-lawyers
might be surprised to learn that our
adversarial system has become a hybrid
system. I think this had made our system
better in terms of its ability to achieve its
goal of fairness of outcome. Though historically grounded in the purely adversarial
system (think gladiator!), we have moved
toward a system that increasingly focuses
on ADR and collaboration, and that also
(4) Identify the one federal or state
court judge, living or dead, whom you
admire the most and explain why.
(Obviously, I can’t follow directions,
because I won’t give you just one name.)
Judge Robert Whaley (Federal District
Court, Eastern District of Washington), for
his humility, fairness and love for his fellow human beings. Judge Steve Warning
(Cowlitz Superior Court) for his ability to
engage everyone in the discussion. Judge
Deborah Fleck (King County Superior
Court) for her passion and perseverance.
Judge Kathleen O’Connor for her courage in doing the right thing even if it isn’t
popular. Retired U. S. Supreme Court
Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, for her refusal to close her mind to compromise, in
the face of unfathomable pressure. (You
Continued on Next Page
and 2008, before the current economic
meltdown, the legislature stepped up and
provided an additional $78M/biennium to
help fund trial courts, indigent defense,
civil legal aid to the indigent and parent
dependency representation. Despite that,
INDEPENDENT MEDICAL
EVALUATIONS & CHART REVIEWS
the state still provides only .7% (7/10
of 1%) and Washington is still 50th out
of 50 states in the percentage of funding the state provides to the trial courts.
Today, Washington State provides only
about 10.5% of the cost of trial courts
and indigent defense. Local governments
have to fund the rest, and all of us see the
devastating results of that unreasonable
burden every day.
My dream is to have the courtroom doors
truly open. By open, I mean providing a
fair, timely and impartial forum, available
to everyone. Without that, our democracy
The MACHAON team makes your job easier:
Scheduling of IMEs when you need them.
Communication with the patient or their legal representative to
arrange a convenient date and time, decreasing the occurrence of no shows
Recruiting the appropriate Physician specialties for your exams.
Quality Assurance of reports to make sure all your questions are answered.
We will, at your request, arrange Transportation, Interpreters, and Diagnostic tests.
“A Classic Return To Service”
MACHAON.org ~ MACHAON Medical Evaluations, Inc.
206-323-1999 ~ Toll Free 1-888-303-6224 ~ Fax 206-323-1188
is truly in jeopardy.
8
Spring 2012
Meet the Judiciary From Page 8
don’t have to agree with her politics or her
(6) Should Washington retain
should be beholden only to the citizens
opinions to appreciate the burden of being
the election system for judges?
and the Rule of Law. The question is, what
the only woman and “the swing vote” on
Why or why not?
is the best way to find those people? How
the U.S. Supreme Court). She handled
There is no clear answer, if that is how
do you predict what putting on a black
herself with dignity.
the question is posed. At its core, isn’t
robe will do to a person?
These are only some of the great judges
that come to mind. I don’t have to look to
the question, to whom will the judge be
beholden?
(7) If you could give some tips to civil
attorneys appearing before you, what
historical or famous jurists to find great
There are excellent judges across our
would they be?
judges. They are all around me.
country, elected (non-partisan, partisan,
Be courteous, be prepared, be ready to
retention, contested), appointed and
answer my questions. We judges have
selected by blue ribbon panels. I have not
a lot to read and most of us take work
observed that the quality or commitment
home, so don’t feel compelled to file
of the judge is determined by the judge’s
paper by the pound. (On the other hand,
route to the bench, and am convinced
if there is a seminal case I need to read,
there is no foolproof way to predict what
can you please attach it to your brief so
kind of judge an individual will be before
I will have it when I get home?) Be clear
sense of responsibility to protect the
they are on the bench. Most people rise
and concise.
people we serve, as well as preserving the
to the occasion. Sometimes the opposite
Rule of Law.
is true.
(5) Describe the most
We also need to ask whether the third
challenging ethical dilemma
branch has acceded too much authority to practice case, but yesterday I may have
you have encountered as a judge.
the other branches. A strong and indepen-
had a TEDRA case, and tomorrow I may
How did you handle it?
dent judiciary is necessary to achieve the
have a consumer protection class action
That depends on how one defines “ethical
balance necessary to a free society. Once
dilemma.” I have certainly had a number
an individual is on the bench he or she
I don’t think a keen legal mind is necessarily the main ingredient of a great
judge, though it is obviously desirable.
The most important attribute of a great
judge is a loving fascination with the human condition and a deep
Please remember Superior Courts in
Washington are courts of general jurisdiction. Today I might have your medical mal-
Continued on Page 11
of difficult decisions. For instance, I don’t
always agree with the Sentencing Guidelines, but I am compelled by my oath to
“Representing Quality
Physicians in the
IME Industry”
support the laws of the State of Washington to impose sentences that are too
lenient or too harsh, given the individual
circumstances (and I have found one
tends to be reversed for following one’s
sense of fairness instead of the Guidelines). It’s difficult and painful to follow the
law when you believe the law is unjust,
and those instances are the most difficult
ethical decisions I have had to make.
The same is true in civil cases: once in a
while your heart disagrees with your logic,
or with the law. Sometimes you have a
strong instinct that is not supported by the
facts as presented, and you wonder if the
facts exist to support your instinct but the
lawyers didn’t give them to you. Being a
judge isn’t a job that lends itself to making
it up as you go long.
Our Mission
Physician Direct Services delivers strong support to our clients. We are
Physician driven and client focused, working directly with Physicians
to deliver complete and professional medical opinions.
Our Vision
To provide outstanding service while connecting the most
qualified Physicians to clients large and small.
~ Providing services in Washington and Oregon ~
Corporate office:Oregon office:
2411 Pacific Ave. SE
1225 NW Murray Rd. #110
Olympia, Washington 98502
Portland, Oregon 97229
[email protected]
[email protected]
Spring 2012
9
WDTL IME CLE
On October 1, 2011, WDTL co-hosted a
There were several learning points from
Finally, due to the success of the CLE
cross-disciplinary CLE involving inde-
the CLE. First, all of the participants
and the overwhelmingly positive re-
pendent medical examiners and IME
agreed that we (as attorneys) can work
sponse, WDTL is considering turning
doctors. Jennifer Smitrovich, an attor-
together to make the IME process more
this CLE into an annual event. The next
ney with Scheer & Zehnder LLP, and Dr.
efficient, which will result in lower costs
CLE is geared to be more process-
Charley Brooks co-chaired this event.
to our clients. Second, the open-
driven, with the focus on improving the
There were more than 120 attendees.
dialogue format allowed the different
IME process, now that the complaints at
The attendees were split evenly between
groups to gain perspective about issues
this CLE have been raised. If you would
attorneys and doctors, with the intent
which may not have been known. This
like more information about this CLE, or
of defining the IME process, address-
openness is sure to lead to a better
any future CLEs, please contact Kristin
ing problems that arise among attor-
practice and, in turn, better service to all
Baldwin at WDTL.
neys, doctors, and IME companies, and
of those involved.
embarking on a candid discussion about
potential solutions to these problems.
The CLE was broken into three phases:
(1) a multi-disciplinary panel of doctors
addressing issues with the IME practice; (2) a panel of attorneys focusing on
problems that IME doctors face with attorneys; and (3) a panel of IME company
representatives addressing issues that
were raised with regard to IME company
practices.
There was a great response to this
CLE. The various speakers and panels
responded to many concerns, such as
customer service between the different groups, the timeliness of providing
stipulations and/or notifying doctors of
restrictions on the IME, and better preparing doctors for depositions and trial
testimony. The participants discussed
several possible solutions to these problems. The attendees and participants
provided feedback indicating that the
CLE was a great success.
10
Spring 2012
Meet the Judiciary From Page 9
or a murder case. I am working as hard as
Spokane has an extraordinarily close legal
(10) If you had a judicial theme song,
I can to catch up with you, the attorney
community. Recently an attorney’s wife
what would it be?
who probably specializes in one or two
had a significant medical event. When I
Respect. Aretha Franklin.
types of cases. It is likely you know your
arrived at the intensive care unit that first
area of law a lot better than I do. I want
day after work, there were already about
What you want ?
to understand your case and your argu-
15 attorneys there. For the entire 52 days
ments. It is your job to help me do that.
of her stay, attorney friends stood vigil
And most importantly, judges know when
with her husband. That’s community.
you are rude to our staff, and most of us
We have twelve Superior Court Judges,
love our staff. I think you see where I am
half of whom are women, a big change
going with this.
since 1994, when I joined Judge Kathleen
(8) What do most civil attorneys “get
O’Connor as the second ever woman
wrong”? How can the civil practice
of law be improved in your opinion?
Be civil. Remember if you make it personal on an emotional level, that might
blur your vision, and you won’t do your
clients justice. I love the passion of young
attorneys, but there is a lot to be said for
the thoughtful analysis of more seasoned
attorneys. Years ago, when I was a young
attorney, a founding partner in a large firm
observed to me, “When I was a young
Superior Court Judge in Spokane County.
(She will want me to emphasize here that
she was the FIRST woman Superior Court
Judge in Spokane County). The entire Superior Court bench has met as a group at
noon on Thursdays for as long as anyone
can remember. We conduct our business,
eat our lunches and enjoy one another’s
company. We are not half as funny as we
think we are when we are joking around
with one another, but then again, we are
lawyer I lost cases I should have won, and
not half as dull as you think we are, either.
now that I am an old lawyer I win cases I
And we have one of the most beauti-
should lose.”
ful courthouses in the country, probably
(9) Most of WDTL’s membership is
modeled after two famous 16th century
west of the mountains. What are
they missing by not practicing in
Spokane?
Of course we know y’all Westsiders think
(oo) Baby, I got
(oo) What you need
(oo) Do you know I got it?
(oo) All I’m askin’
(oo) Is for a little respect when you come
home (just a little bit)
Hey baby (just a little bit) when you get
home
(just a little bit) mister (just a little bit)
I ain’t gonna do you wrong while
you’re gone
Ain’t gonna do you wrong (oo) ‘cause I
don’t wanna (oo)
All I’m askin’ (oo)
Is for a little respect when you come home
(just a little bit) Baby (just a little bit) when
you get home (just a little bit)
Yeah (just a little bit)
Of course, I would get rid of the
“baby”s, and instead of “home”
I would say “to court.”
chateaux in the Loire Valley of France, the
Chateau de Chambord, designed by a 29
year old who received his training from a
correspondence course!
we live in the hinterlands. But here’s the
thing: We pretty much know one another,
and that carries with it an accountability
one may not see in a larger legal community. Most lawyers are collegial and
professional most of the time, and mindful
that they will be dealing with the same
judge and opposing counsel again. It is
easy to ruin a reputation in a community
this size, but also perhaps easier to build
one. The downside is that we don’t yet
have the richness that a more prevalent
diversity affords.
Spring 2012
11
2011: Medical Malpractice Year in Review
By Erin H. Hammond
Second Tier Beneficiaries Must Be Dependent
ings. In light of this, despite the case law holding that RCW
to Recover & Mandatory Reporters May Be Held Liable
7.70 is the exclusive remedy for an injury arising out of health
for Failure to Report
care, a health care provider may be held liable for a failure to
Beggs v. Dep’t of Social and Health Svcs., 171 Wn.2d 69; 247
report under RCW 25.44.030.
P.3d 421 (2011) (Maj. Author: Sanders, J. pro tempore).1 An
Court Determines if Mediation Request
adoptive mother killed her son through neglect and abuse. The
was Served and Effective
boy’s adoptive siblings and estate sued DSHS and his treating
physicians and medical clinic. Defendants moved for partial
summary judgment, arguing that the siblings were not qualified
second tier beneficiaries under the wrongful death and survival
statutes. The health care providers also argued that they were
not subject to a civil claim for failure to report abuse and neglect.
Cortez-Kloehn v. Morrison, 162 Wn. App. 166; 252 P.3d 909
(2011) (Div. III, Author: Korsmo, A.C.J.). The treatment at issue
ended in February 2006. Plaintiff’s paralegal testified that a request to mediate was sent in August 2007. Defendants denied
receiving the request. A lawsuit was filed in October 2009.
The trial court dismissed it on summary judgment based on the
The Supreme Court reviewed the statutory beneficiaries under
statute of limitations, finding that plaintiff had not established
Washington’s wrongful death and survival statues, and ex-
that the mediation request was served.
plained that, when it comes to individual claimants, the statutory scheme provides for recovery to “first tier” beneficiaries
(spouses, registered domestic partners, and children and step
children). Alternatively, and only if no first tier beneficiaries exist,
“second tier” beneficiaries may recover. Second tier beneficiaries are parents and siblings of the decedent, provided that they
were dependent on the decedent and resident in US at the time
of death. Though “dependent” is not statutorily defined, the
On appeal, the plaintiff argued it was a question of fact whether
the request had been served. The Court of Appeals disagreed.
It explained that juries find facts underlying a case and render
a verdict. Judges determine legal questions and make factual
determinations required to answer legal questions, including
whether a lawsuit was timely filed, whether service was effected,
and whether the requirements of RCW 7.70.110 were met.
case law holds that there must be a “substantial” dependency
financially or for services in order to qualify in this context.
Here, the court rejected the siblings’ contention that they were
dependent on the boy because they benefitted from the support
the state paid his adoptive mother to care for him. Those payments were not meant to provide profit to the adoptive parent
or to support other members of the family. There were separate
payments for the other children. With no other showing of dependency, the siblings were not qualified beneficiaries and their
claims were properly dismissed.
The health care providers also argued that they could not be
held liable under the mandatory reporting statute for a failure to
report the abuse and neglect, because their liability was governed exclusively by RCW 7.70. The Supreme Court rejected
this argument.
First, the court clarified that the mandatory reporting statute,
RCW 26.44.030, creates a civil cause of action for failure to
report. Second, it found that a health care provider may have
cause to believe abuse or neglect exists without providing health
care (i.e., without examining, diagnosing, treating, or caring
for the abused child). The court also noted that a report from
a provider that he or she has cause to believe there is abuse
or neglect triggers a DSHS investigation. In contrast, a report
based on expert medical opinion triggers dependency proceed12
Spring 2012
Continued on Next Page
Malpractice From Page 12
The Court of Appeals noted that the trial
his competitors, or that he relied upon his
was in a car accident that resulted in cata-
court was not convinced that the media-
vision in any way to promote his practice.
strophic injuries. While hospitalized, he
tion request had been served, and stated
Instead, the nondisclosure was merely
received a transfusion of the wrong blood
that it (the Court of Appeals) did not have
related to his judgment and treatment of
type. Eventually he died. The estate
authority to reweigh the evidence and
a patient. If the physician were unable to
asserted the death was due to the transfu-
determine otherwise. It also noted that
properly diagnose or treat patients, that
sion error, rather than the plethora of other
the draft letters produced by the plaintiff
claim could be pursued on a negligence
medical problems. The jury returned a
did not constitute a request for mediation.
theory.
defense verdict.
They simply stated that this would be a
Compensation by
The estate alleged that a defense ex-
Settlement is Admissible
pert materially changed certain opinions
Diaz v. State, 161 Wn. App. 500; 251 P.3d
between his deposition and his trial
good case to mediate. “An offer to attend
mediation is not a request for mediation.”
Additionally, the Court of Appeals rejected
plaintiff’s argument that RCW 7.70.110
makes the statute of limitations for medical malpractice cases four years.
249 (2011) (Div. I, Author: Appelwick, J.).
Plaintiff sued a number of health care providers alleging misdiagnosis of cancer and
resulting harm. Plaintiff received $400,000
testimony, and that the changes were undisclosed prior to the trial testimony. The
trial court refused to strike the expert’s
testimony, and denied a motion for a new
trial. However, it did allow the plaintiff ad-
No CPA Claim for Nondisclosure
in settlement from two defendants, vol-
Unrelated to Procuring or Retaining
untarily dismissed a third, and proceeded
Patients
to trial against two more. The fact and
that was requested mid-trial.
Dalien v. Jackson, 250 P.3d 130; 2011
amount of settlement were introduced
The Court of Appeals disagreed there had
into evidence under RCW 7.70.080, the
been any change in testimony on one
statute restricting the collateral source rule
issue. On another, it determined that the
in health care negligence cases. The jury
change was only minor and insubstantial.
eye. He had required surgery and four
returned a defense verdict.
Also, there was no evidence of any delib-
weeks off work. He then performed plain-
Plaintiff challenged the introduction of set-
erate attempt to mislead by the defendant
tiff’s breast augmentation. After she lost
tlement evidence. The Court of Appeals
weight, plaintiff required multiple revision
held that the statute is unambiguous. It
surgeries. She filed two lawsuits; the first
allows any party remaining in a lawsuit
opinion prior to his trial testimony.
alleged negligence and lack of informed
after another defendant has settled out to
Under the circumstances, and given that
consent. The second was filed as a puta-
present evidence of plaintiff’s compensa-
the question when considering a re-
tive class action, alleging a Consumer
tion by settlement money.
quest for a new trial is whether the party
The court also rejected plaintiff’s conten-
received a fair trial the first time, the Court
Wash. App. LEXIS 919 (unpublished) (Div.
II, Author: Hartman, J., judge pro tempore).
Defendant plastic surgeon had injured his
Protection Act violation.
This opinion dealt primarily with the CPA
tion that ER 408 precluded admission of
claim. In health care, a valid CPA claim
the evidence. ER 408 prohibits admis-
may only arise out of the entrepreneurial
sion of evidence of settlement to prove
aspects of the practice. The court stated
liability or to prove invalidity of a claim
that the entrepreneurial aspects of the
or its amount. The court held that RCW
practice are billing and retaining patients,
7.70.080 does not allow the evidence for
not competence or treatment strategies.
those purposes. Instead, its purpose is
Plaintiff asserted that soliciting and retain-
to allow the jury to reduce the award to
ing patients without disclosing the previ-
prevent overcompensation of medical
ous eye surgery was an entrepreneurial
malpractice plaintiffs.
act, because if it had been disclosed, pa-
Opportunity for Impeachment
tients would opt to treat elsewhere. The
Remedied Minor Change In Expert
court rejected this argument, stating that
Opinion at Trial
the nondisclosure did not relate to billing
or obtaining or retaining patients, because
there was no evidence that the physician
represented that he had better vision than
Fletcher v. State, 2011 Wash. App. LEXIS
1374 (unpublished) (Div. I, Author: Lau, J.).
Plaintiff was in very poor health when he
ditional time for cross examination when
or its counsel, and there was no evidence
that they knew of the expert’s change in
of Appeals found no abuse of discretion in
the trial court’s rulings. The trial court is in
the best position to answer the questions
of fairness and prejudice, and here it appropriately determined that impeachment
during cross examination was sufficient to
allow for a fair trial. This was also an appropriate remedy even if there had been a
discovery violation (though evidence of a
violation was lacking); it was not an abuse
of discretion to impose only a “lesser
sanction” of impeachment.
Expert Qualification & No Magic
Words for Standard of Care
Leaverton v. Cascade Surgical Partners,
PLLC, 160 Wn. App. 512, 248 P.3d 136
Continued on Page 14
Spring 2012
13
Malpractice From Page 13
(2011) (Div. III, Author: Sweeney, J.).
her claim of corporate negligence, she
in the diagnosis and treatment of a stroke
Plaintiff suffered injury during a proce-
sought discovery of eight years of medical
caused a loss of a chance of a better
dure by a general surgeon. She retained
records of other patients who suffered
outcome. Unlike the leading case on the
two otolaryngologists as experts. Both
injury or complications in connection with
loss of chance issue, Herskovits v. Group
testified that the surgeon had performed
IV infusion at the hospital.
Health Coop. of Puget Sound, 99 Wn.2d
electrocautery too close to the (unlocated)
left recurrent laryngeal nerve.
The hospital did not argue that the information was irrelevant. Instead, it argued
609, 664 P.2d 474 (1983), this case did not
involve a death. Defendant had successfully argued at the trial court that loss of
The first issue was whether, being from a
that it would be unduly burdensome to
different specialty, the otolaryngologists
locate the requested records unless it
could testify against a general surgeon.
used its quality assurance database. It ar-
The court ruled that the requisite founda-
gued that it was statutorily prohibited from
The Supreme Court disagreed, holding that
tion had been laid. The otolaryngolo-
doing so by RCW 70.41.200(3), which ex-
such a limitation would be arbitrary. In-
gists demonstrated their familiarity with
empts QA/QI information and documents
stead, “…Herskovits applies to lost chance
the anatomy, the type of procedure, and
from review, disclosure, or discovery in
claims where the ultimate harm is some se-
related matters.
civil litigation. The argument was that
rious injury short of death.” The Supreme
The second issue was whether plain-
any search results necessarily would be
Court also formally adopted the Herskovits
derivative of the privileged materials that
plurality reasoning, determining that the
know the applicable standard of care for
were not subject to disclosure.
loss of chance itself is the injury/harm.
a general surgeon required dismissal of
On discretionary review, the Court of Ap-
The issue of apparent authority of non-
the claim. The Court of Appeals said no,
peals held that the statute does not pro-
employed physicians also arose in this
stating that the specific terms “standard
hibit internal review of committee records
case. The plaintiff had signed a form
of care” need not be used in expert testi-
by hospital personnel. It also noted that
stating that the attending physician is not
mony. It then refocused on the experts’
the statute does not prohibit disclosure
an employee or agent of the hospital. The
knowledge and qualifications.
of original source documents simply be-
Supreme Court said that was just one
The court stated that the experts had, “the
cause they were introduced in committee.
factor to consider in determining if the
requisite knowledge about the standard
Lost Opportunity for Cure Not Limited
hospital is vicariously liable for a physi-
of practice for anyone surgically treating
to Death Cases & Apparent Authority a
this condition, and should therefore be
Question of Fact
tiff’s experts’ testimony that they did not
allowed to testify about that standard.”
Unfortunately, the opinion does not detail
the testimony, and it is hard to understand how an expert could testify that s/
Mohr v. Grantham, 172 Wn.2d 844; 262
P.3d 490 (2011) (Maj. Author: Owens, J.).2
Plaintiff claimed that medical negligence
he knows the standard for everyone, but
does not know the standard for general
surgeons. Nevertheless, this case suggests that, in this particular instance,
this court was willing to allow standard
of care testimony to be in the form of a
physician’s testimony that, regardless of
specialty, any physician performing this
particular procedure must do x, and this
general surgeon failed to do x.
Quality Privilege Does Not Preclude
Internal Record Review by Hospital
Lowy v. PeaceHealth, 159 Wn. App. 715,
247 P.3d 7 (2011) (Div. I, Author: Becker,
J.). Plaintiff sustained neurological injury
following IV infusion. In connection with
14
Spring 2012
chance claims should only be available in
death cases.
cian’s care. It noted that the discharge
instructions discussed the physician’s
care, billing was handled by the hospital,
Continued on Next Page
Malpractice From Page 14
the physician wore a hospital name tag,
Expert testimony on a more probable than
tions, it held that the elimination of tolling
and his specialty was “hospitalist.” Also,
not basis it required, and was missing.
for minors is not retroactive. Statutes
with the respect to emergency services,
Summary judgment dismissing the claim
that impose a new limitations period are
it noted that the ER is an essential part of
was appropriate.
presumed to run prospectively unless the
hospital operations. Given all these fac-
Minority Toll Elimination and Statute of
legislature expressly intends otherwise,
tors, the court ruled that the existence of
agency/apparent authority was a question
for the jury in this case.
Expert Testimony of Causation
Is Still Required
Repose are Prospective Only & Carrier
Can Receive Mediation Request
Unruh v. Cacchiotti, 172 Wn.2d 98; 257
P.3d 631(2011) (en banc) (Author: Stephens, J.). Plaintiff alleged that negligent
Smith v. Multicare Health Sys., 2011
orthodontic treatment caused her to lose
Wash. App. LEXIS 1432 (unpublished)
teeth and to require implants. Her braces
(Div. I, Author: Becker, J.). A terminal
were removed in August 1999, when she
pediatric cancer patient was adminis-
was 13 years old. Her parents claimed
tered six times the prescribed amount of
that they had no idea there might have
a medication. The defendant moved for
been negligence in her orthodontic treat-
summary judgment, arguing there was no
ment until almost seven years later, in
evidence that the medication error had
March 2006.
caused any harm to the girl.
A lawsuit was filed. Defendant moved for
Plaintiffs’ expert’s opposition declaration
summary judgment on statute of limita-
began, “I give the opinion in this declara-
tions and statute of repose grounds. The
tion on a more probable than not standard
defendant relied upon the June 2006
of medical certainty.” As for the sub-
amendments to the health care laws that
stance of the opinion, the expert offered
eliminated statute of limitations tolling for
only “…it is probable the higher dose
minors in health care negligence cases and
could cause adverse effects indistinguish-
reinstituted the eight year statute of repose.
able from those of central nervous system
relapse of acute lymphoblastic leukemia in
the plaintiff.”
The Supreme Court rejected both arguments. In addressing the statute of limita-
and that express statement of intent was
missing here. Thus, normally, if a claim
accrued before the statute went into effect,
the new limitations period begins to run on
the effective date of the enacting statute.
In this case, the plaintiff had turned 18 on
January 3, 2004. Because she was already an adult when the new statute went
into effect, it simply had no effect on her
claim. Instead, she had received the benefit of the previous minority toll in health
care litigation, and her three years began
running when she turned 18 years old.
She also received the benefit of a 90 day
toll in connection with a notice of intent
to sue, and a one year toll in connection
with a request for mediation, and therefore
her lawsuit was timely filed in September
2007 for statute of limitations purposes.
In analyzing the tolls plaintiff had received, the Supreme Court held that RCW
7.70.110 doesn’t require personal service
of a request for mediation, but implicit
Continued on Page 16
The Court of Appeals found that, despite
the use of the “more probable than not”
language in the beginning of the declaration, the expert’s opinion did not state that
the increased dose caused or even probably caused harm to the child. As a matter
of law, this testimony was insufficient on
causation and summary judgment was
properly granted.
The estate argued that the timing of
adverse change in condition (the same
day as the medication error), subsequent
diagnosis with chemotherapy toxicity,
and the mother’s testimony that the child
changed drastically for the worse after
the medication error should save the
claim. The Court of Appeals disagreed,
holding that drawing causation from mere
temporal correlation would be speculative.
Spring 2012
15
Malpractice From Page 15
is the notion that the defendant receives
must “substantially prejudice the oppo-
employed physician who presented to
notice. Here, the request had been sent
nents’ ability to prepare for trial to warrant
her hospital’s emergency department
to the defendant’s carrier. The court
reversal and a new trial.” (4) A strong
complaining of migraine headache. The
found that the record showed the carrier
affirmative showing of juror misconduct
emergency physician ordered Imitrex. The
“took responsibility” from the beginning
is necessary to overcome the policies
decedent had an adverse reaction, and
by discussing potential for settlement and
favoring stable and certain verdicts and
eventually passed away from complica-
responding to a mediation request, and
secret, frank, and free discussion by the
tions. The estate sued the emergency
therefore was the doctor’s agent autho-
jury. Determination of whether juror mis-
physician and the hospital, and both
rized to receive the request for mediation
conduct occurred, and whether it affected
moved for summary judgment arguing
on his behalf.
the verdict are subject to review only for
that there were no statutory beneficiaries
The eight year statute of repose did not
abuse of discretion.
to support a survival action. The hospital
kill the claim either. The Supreme Court
General Survival Action Available
also argued that the emergency physician
held that the statute of repose also was
Without Statutory Beneficiaries & More
prospective only, and therefore did not
on Apparent Agency
begin running until the day the new statute of repose law went into effect, June 7,
2006. The statute of repose therefore will
not preclude claims until June 2014.
Wilson v. Grant, 162 Wn. App. 731; 258
P.3d 689 (2011) (Div. III, Author: Sweeney, J.). The decedent was a hospital
It should also be noted that, in a footnote,
the court stated, “While we do not decide
this case on constitutional grounds, in
Gilbert we indicated that the categorical
elimination of tolling for minors would give
rise to ‘compelling’ constitutional challenges.” (quotes in the original). We can
expect this to resurface in later cases on
the issue.
Motion to Amend, Discovery
Supplementation, and Alleged
Juror Misconduct
Vestal v. Franciscan Health Sys. – West,
2011 Wash. App. LEXIS 853 (unpublished)
(Div. II, Author: Armstrong, J.).3 Appeal
from defense verdict in a death case.
Holdings: (1) The trial court’s finding of
prejudice in support of denial of a motion
to amend the complaint was not manifestly unreasonable or based on untenable grounds and therefore was upheld.
(2) A defendant does not have to identify
a non-party at fault as an affirmative
defense when it does not contend that
that non-party is at “fault” as that term is
statutorily defined (even if, as in this case,
the defendant does contend that the nonparty was responsible). (3) Even if a defendant violates a CR 26 duty to supplement
discovery responses, a discovery violation
16
Spring 2012
was not its agent and therefore it had no
vicariously liability.
Continued on Next Page
Malpractice From Page 16
The Court of Appeals reversed the trial
Erin Hammond is an experienced defense
concurred in Justice Johnson’s dissent.
court’s dismissal. It explained that the
attorney who focuses her practice on
Among other things, it was noted that
existence of statutory beneficiaries (as
representing health care providers in court
the majority rationale allows liability to be
required for a wrongful death action or a
and administrative proceedings. She is
imposed based upon possibilities, rather
claim under the special survival statute)
also a member of the WDTL Board of
than probabilities.
is irrelevant to a claim under the general
Trustees. Erin can be reached at erin@
3 I will not say much about this case,
survival statute. The pertinent question is
ehammondlaw.com or (253) 237-0587.
as I handled the appeal for one of the
1 Justice Alexander (ret.) concurred
defendants.
simply whether the decedent could have
brought the claim if she had survived.
Under this statute, the decedent’s estate
can recover economic damages as a matter of law.
in part and dissented in part.
2 Justices Madsen and James Johnson
authored dissents. Justice Alexander
As for vicarious liability, the court noted
that a hospital may be held liable on apparent agency principles (often referred
to as “ostensible agency” in medical malpractice cases). Even if there is no actual
agency, apparent agency is created when
the principal’s conduct causes another to
reasonably believe that a third party is her
servant or agent.
To recover on this theory, the estate
needed to show both the existence of
apparent agency and reliance on the apparent agency by the decedent. The court
rejected the hospital’s arguments that the
decedent physician was employed by the
hospital and therefore knew that there
were independent contractors working
in the ED. It also rejected the fact that
the consent form (which was signed by
the decedent’s significant other) explicitly
called this out.
The court ultimately held that there was
a question of fact. In its opinion, it was
not unreasonable for the decedent to
believe that the emergency physician was
employed, and the jury could find that the
emergency physician was held out as an
employee of the hospital.
Spring 2012
17
PRESIDENT
PRESIDENT-ELECT
Matthew Wojcik
Mullin Law Group PLLC
101 Yesler Avenue, Suite 400
Seattle, WA 98104
206.957.7007 voice
206.957.7008 fax
[email protected]
Board Advisor
Ted Buck
Stafford Frey Cooper
601 Union Street, Suite 3100
Seattle, WA 98101
206.667.8254 voice
206.624.6885 fax
[email protected]
DRI State Representative
Jill Haavig Stone
Stone|Novasky LLC.
One North Tacoma Avenue,
Suite 201
Tacoma, WA 98403
253.327.1042 voice
253.327.1047 fax
[email protected]
Committee Coordinator
Dirk Holt
Scheer & Zehnder L.L.P.
701 Pike Street, Suite 2200
Seattle, WA 98101
206.262.1200 voice
206.223.4065 fax
[email protected]
Judicial Liaison Chair
Dan L. Johnson
Law Offices of Shahin Karim
520 Pike Street, Suite 1300
Seattle, WA 98101
206.405.1911 voice
206.405.1916 fax
[email protected]
Court Rules Chair
Lane Powell PC
1420 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4100
Seattle WA 98101-2338
206.223.7062 voice
206.223.7107 fax
[email protected]
AMICUS
Stewart Estes
Keating, Bucklin,
McCormack
800 5th Ave, Suite 4141
Seattle WA 98101-2509
206.623.8861 voice
206.233.9423 fax
[email protected]
CIVIC APPOINTMENTS
OPEN
BAR LIAISON
James Macpherson
Kopta & Macpherson
365 Ericksen Ave.,
Suite 325
Bainbridge Island WA
98110
206.780.4050 voice
206.780.3868 fax
[email protected]
ASBESTOS/TOXIC TORTS
Melissa Roeder
Forsberg & Umlauf, P.S.
900 4th Ave, Suite 1400
Seattle WA 98164-1039
206.689.8500 voice
206.689.8501 fax
[email protected]
COMMERCIAL LITIGATION
James Howard
Dorsey & Whitney LLP
U.S. Bank Centre
1420 Fifth Avenue, Suite 3400
Seattle, WA 98101-4010
206.903.2390 voice
206.903.8820 fax
[email protected]
Membership
Erin Hammond
P.O. Box 23251
Federal Way, WA 98093
253.237.0587 voice
253.237.0701 fax
[email protected]
Publications Chair
Erin Hammond
P.O. Box 23251
Federal Way, WA 98093
253.237.0587 voice
253.237.0701 fax
[email protected]
Past President
Emilia Sweeney
Carney Badley Spellman P.S.
701 5th Avenue, Suite 3600
Seattle, WA 98104
206.607.4187 voice
206.622.8983 fax
[email protected]
Public Relations Chair
Jennifer Campbell
Schwabe, Williamson and Wyatt
1420 Fifth Avenue, Suite 3400
Seattle, WA 98101-2338
206.689.3052 voice
206.292.0460 fax
[email protected]
Programs Chair
Maggie Sweeney
Preg, O'Donnell & Gillett, PLLC
Suite 1500
1800 9th Avenue
Seattle, WA 98101
206.287.1775 voice
206.287.9113 fax
[email protected]
Strategic Planning Chair
Linda Gallagher
King County Prosecutor's Office
900 Fourth Avenue, Suite 900
Seattle, WA 98104
206.296.8820 voice
206.296.8819 fax
[email protected]
COMMITTEE
COORDINATOR
Dirk Holt
Scheer & Zehnder L.L.P.
701 Pike Street, Suite 2200
Seattle, WA 98101
206.262.1200 voice
206.223.4065 fax
[email protected]
COURT RULES
Michael Runyan
Lane Powell PC
1420 Fifth Avenue, Suite
4100
Seattle WA 98101-2338
206.223.7062 voice
206.223.7107 fax
[email protected]
COMMUNITY SERVICES
Heather Carr
Stafford Frey Cooper PC
3100 Two Union Square
3100 Two Union Square
Seattle WA 98101
206.623.9900 voice
206.624.6885 04 fax
[email protected]
JUDICIAL LIAISON
Dan Johnson
Law Offices of
Shahin Karim
520 Pike Street,
Suite 1300
Seattle WA 98101
206.405.1900 voice
[email protected]
EMPLOYMENT
Geoffrey M. Boodell
Forsberg & Umlauf, P.S.
Suite 1400
901 5th Avenue
Seattle, WA 98164
206.689.8500 voice
206.689.8501 fax
[email protected]
IN-HOUSE COUNSEL
Scott Noel
Law Offices of
Kelley J. Sweeney
1191 2nd Ave., Suite 500
Seattle, WA 98101-2990
206.473.4519 voice
206.473.4031 fax
[email protected]
CORPORATE COUNSEL
William M. Symmes
Witherspoon Kelley
422 W. Riverside Ave., Suite
1100
Spokane, WA 99201
509.755.2026 voice
[email protected]
GOVERNMENT LIABILITY
Michael Bolasina
Summit Law Group, PLLC
315 Fifth Avenue S, Suite 1000
Seattle, WA 98101
206.676.7000 voice
206.676.7001 fax
[email protected]
INSURANCE
Irene Hecht
Keller Rohrback LLP
1201 Third Avenue, Suite 3200
Seattle WA 98101-3052
206.623.1900 voice
206.623.3384 fax
[email protected]
South Sound
Ema Virdi
Gierke, Curwen P.S.
2102 North Pearl Street
Suite 400, Building D
Tacoma, WA 98406-2550
253.752.1600 voice
253.752.1666 fax
[email protected]
Southwest Washington
Jillian Hinman
Smith, Freed & Eberhard P.C.
111 SW Fifth Avenue,
Suite 4300
Portland, OR 97204
503.227.2424 voice
503.227.2535 fax
[email protected]
TREASURER
Melissa Roeder
Forsberg & Umlauf, P.S.
900 4th Ave, Suite 1400
Seattle WA 98164-1039
206.689.8500 voice
206.689.8501 fax
[email protected]
CONSTRUCTION
Scott Clement
Clement & Drotz, PLLC
Pier 30070, 2801 Alaskan Way
Seattle, Washington
98121-1134
206.448.9595 voice
206.448.2235 fax
[email protected]
Central Washington
Megan Murphy
Thorner, Kennedy & Gano P.S.
101 S. 12th Avenue
Yakima, WA 98902
509.575.1400 voice
509.453.6874 fax
[email protected]
18
Legislative Chair
Lori O’Tool
Preg, O'Donnell & Gillett, PLLC
Suite 1500
1800 9th Avenue
Seattle, WA 98101
206.287.1775 voice
206.287.9113 fax
[email protected]
BOARD DEVELOPMENT
Ryan Beaudoin
Witherspoon Kelley
422 W. Riverside Ave.,
Suite 1100
Spokane, WA 99201
509.624.5265 voice
[email protected]
SECRETARY
Ryan Beaudoin
Witherspoon, Kelley
1100 U.S. Bank Building
422 W Riverside Ave
Spokane WA 99201-0302
509.624.5265 voice
509.458.2728 fax
[email protected]
Trustee at Large
Edward Bruya
Keefe, Bowman & Bruya, P.S.
Ste 1102, W 601 Main Ave
Spokane WA 99201
509.624.8988 voice
509.623.1380 fax
[email protected]
Trustee at Large
Heather Carr
Stafford Frey Cooper
3100 Two Union Square
601 Union Street
Seattle WA 98101
206.667.8218 voice
206.624.6885 fax
[email protected]
Trustee at Large
Michael Bolasina
Summit Law Group
Suite 1000
315 Fifth Avenue South
Seattle, WA 98104
206.676.7000 voice
206.676.7001 fax
[email protected]
Trustee at Large
Jillian Hinman
Smith, Freed & Eberhard P.C.
111 SW Fifth Avenue, Suite 4300
Portland, OR 97204
503.227.2424 voice
503.227.2535 fax
[email protected]
LEGISLATIVE
COMMITTEE
Lori O’Tool
Preg, O'Donnell &
Gillett, PLLC
Suite 1500
1800 9th Avenue
Seattle, WA 98101
206.287.1775 voice
206.287.9113 fax
[email protected]
MEMBERSHIP
Erin Hammond
P.O. Box 23251
Federal Way, WA 98093
253.237.0587 voice
253.237.0701 fax
[email protected]
PAST PRESIDENTS
Rick Roberts
Law Offices of
Sharon Bitcon
200 W. Mercer, Suite 111
Seattle, WA 98119
206.288.1507 voice
206.286.1941 fax
richard.roberts2@thehartfo
rd.com
PRACTICE
DEVELOPMENT
Rachel Tallon Reynolds
Preg, O'Donnell &
Gillett, PLLC
1800 9th Ave., Suite 1500
Seattle, WA 98101
206.287.1775 voice
206.287.9113 fax
[email protected]
PREMISES LIABILITY
Maggie Bruya Kirschner
Forsberg & Umlauf, P.S.
Suite 1400
901 5th Avenue
Seattle, WA 98164
206.689.8500 voice
206.689.8501 fax
[email protected]
Spring 2012
Trustee at Large
Megan Murphy
Thorner, Kennedy & Gano P.S.
101 S. 12th Avenue
Yakima, WA 98902
509.575.1400 voice
509.453.6874 fax
[email protected]
Trustee at Large
Brad Smith
Ewing Anderson PS
522 West Riverside, Suite 800
Spokane WA 99201
509.838.4261 voice
509.838.4906 fax
[email protected]
Trustee at Large
Lisa Marchese
Dorsey & Whitney
701 Fifth Avenue, Suite 6100
Seattle, WA 98104-7043
206.903.2379 voice
206. 903.8820 fax
[email protected]
MARITIME
Katie Mattison
Lane Powell
1420 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4100
Seattle WA 98101
206.223.7000 voice
206.223.7107 fax
[email protected]
Eastern Washington
North Sound
Brad Smith
Open
Ewing Anderson PS
522 West Riverside, Suite 800
Spokane WA 99201
509.838.4261 voice
509.838.4906 fax
[email protected]
Michael Nicefaro
Office of the Attorney General
Suite 2100
800 Fifth Avenue
Seattle WA 98164
206.464.7352 voice
206.587.4229 fax
[email protected]
PROGRAMS
Maggie Sweeney
Preg, O'Donnell &
Gillett, PLLC
1800 9th Ave., Suite 1500
Seattle, WA 98101
206.287.1775 voice
206.287.9113 fax
[email protected]
PUBLIC RELATIONS
Jennifer Campbell
Schwabe, Williamson
and Wyatt
1420 5th Ave., Suite 3010
Seattle WA 98101-2338
206.689.3052 voice
206.292.0460 fax
[email protected]
PUBLICATIONS
Erin Hammond
P.O. Box 23251
Federal Way, WA 98093
253.237.0587 voice
253.237.0701 fax
[email protected]
STRATEGIC PLANNING
Linda Gallagher
King County
Prosecutor's Office
900 4th Ave., Suite 900
Seattle, WA 98104
206.296.8820 voice
206.296.8819 fax
linda.gallagher@
kingcounty.gov
PREMISES LIABILITY
A. Grant Lingg
Forsberg & Umlauf, P.S.
Suite 1400
901 5th Avenue
Seattle, WA 98164
206.689.8500 voice
206.689.8501 fax
[email protected]
PRODUCT LIABILITY
Lisa Marchese
Dorsey & Whitney LLP
U.S. Bank Centre
1420 Fifth Avenue, Suite 3400
Seattle, WA 98101-4010
206.903.2379 voice
206.903.8820 fax
[email protected]
PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY
Tim Ashcraft
Williams Kastner & Gibbs
1301 A St #900
Tacoma WA 98402
253.593.5620 voice
253.593.5625 fax
[email protected]
PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY
Gerrit Ayers
Fitzer, Leighton & Ayers, LLC
1145 Broadway, Suite 400
Tacoma WA 98402
253.683.4501 voice
253.627.8928 fax
[email protected]
Executive Director
Kristin Baldwin
800 Fifth Avenue,
Suite 4141
Seattle, WA 98104
206.749.0319 voice
206.749.0321 fax
[email protected]
WORKERS’
COMPENSATION
Mary E. Levenson
Eims & Flynn, P.S.
216 First Avenue South,
Suite 310
Seattle, WA 98104
206.521.4944 voice
206.521.4940 Fax
[email protected]
Spring 2012
19
PRSRT STD
U.S. Postage
PAID
Seattle, WA
Permit No. 5544
WDTL Events Calendar
for 2011-2012
(register online at www.wdtl.org)
April
6
CLE - Insurance Law Update – Seattle – W
19
Judicial Reception – Spokane
CLE - Managing Partner’s Breakfast – Seattle
May
CLE - Products Liability – Seattle
July
19-21 Annual Convention – Skamania Resort,
Stevenson, Washington
(W – Simultaneous Webcast)
Congratulations to...
Forsberg & Umlauf for winning the
2011 Golden Coat award for the most
donations during the warm accessory
drive in October.