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