GENERAL RULE 9

RULE AMENDMENT COVER SHEET

Suggested Amendments to the General Rules; the Code of Judicial Conduct; the Discipline Rules for Judges; the Rules of Professional Conduct; the Admission to Practice Rules (LPO RPC, ELPOC); the Rules for Enforcement of Lawyer Conduct; and the Rules of Evidence:

 [GR 3.1, 5, 10, 12.4, 21, 22, 23, 26, 29, 30,

31.1, 33, 34; CJC II, III, 1.3 Comment, 2.11, 2.12 Comment, 3.4, 3.7, 3.8, 3.11,

3.14, 4.1, 4.1 Comment, 4.2, 4.4, 4.5; DRJ 13; APR 8, 9, 12, 14, 15, 15 Regulation,

19, 22.1, 23, 24.1, 25.2, 28, 28 Regulation; LPO RPC Terminology, 1.2; 1.6, 1.8,

1.10; ELPOC 2.3, 2.8, 4.1, 5.1, 5.7, 8.1, 8.3, 9.2, 10.14, 11.12, 12.6, 314.1, 14.2,

14.4 ; LLLT RPC Fundamental Principles, 1.2, 1.10, 5.5 Comment, 8.4; RPC

Fundamental Principles, 1.0, 1.2 Comment, 1.6 Comment, 1.8 Comment, 1.10

Comment, 1.13, 1.13 Comment, 1.14 Comment, 1.18 Comment, 4.2 Comment, 4.3

Comment, 6.1 Comment, 8.4, 8.5, 8.5 Comment; ELC 2.3, 2.5, 2.7, 2.10, 4.1, 4.9

Title and Rule, 5.1, 5.8, 8.1, 8.2, 8.3, 9.3, 10.14, 11.14, 12.4, 12.6, 14.1, 14.2, 14.4;

ER 803; 1101].

1.     Proponent: Consortium to Address Biased and Non-Inclusive Language in Court Rules (Justice Mary Yu; QLaw, the LGBTQ+ Bar Association of Washington; and students from Seattle University School of Law)

2.     Spokesperson & Contact Info: Madeline Pfeiffer, Gabriel Neuman, Laura Del Villar,

3.     Purpose of Proposed Rule Amendment: To identify biased and non- inclusive language in the court rules and to replace such language with neutral word(s) or re-write the rule utilizing neutral language that does not change the substantive meaning of the rule.

4.     Is Expedited Consideration Requested? No, the proposed changes are not time-sensitive.

5.     Is a Public Hearing Recommended? No