The Worthy Editor has asked me to write a “Meet the Judge” article about Andrea Darvas. I suppose I was chosen because I know her pretty well. He asked me to write about our practice together, about what Andrea has done to prepare to be a Superior Court Judge, and about what she will be like as a Judge.

Andrea and I both were admitted to the Washington Bar in 1982, and we practiced separately until 1991, when we formed Heller & Darvas. By the time you read this, Heller & Darvas will have transitioned into Heller Law Office and the Honorable Andrea Darvas.

What was Andrea’s practice? For most of the past 22 years, Andrea has been representing hundreds and hundreds of living, breathing human beings. She handled personal injury and insurance cases, from the simplest of auto accidents to the most complex of medical negligence cases. She also developed considerable expertise in all sides of lawyer ethics cases. She acted as special independent disciplinary counsel for the Bar, and won an ethics case before the Washington Supreme Court. Later she defended lawyers who had been accused of ethical violations. Later still, she became a hearing officer for the Bar, and presided over disciplinary cases.

How has Andrea been preparing to be a judge? Andrea did not spring into the world full-grown, like Athena from Zeus’s brow. Her preparation to be a judge began long before she entered law school. Andrea knows how to work: Her prior jobs included truck stop waitress, horse trainer, and dog poop remover at a veterinary hospital.

She knows how to set goals and work until they are achieved: at age nine she announced she would buy a horse, and at age 15 she bought one with money she had saved over six years of babysitting and doing odd jobs. She has a way with living things: she trained her horse so well he came when he was called, she trained her dog so well he earned trophies in competitive obedience trials, and she grows orchids even though we don’t have a hothouse.

Andrea spent over 22 years in Washington courtrooms, and she is an expert on civil litigation. Over the past year she has been studying hard in those areas of the law she was less familiar with. She has been to many, many seminars this year on topics other than civil litigation. And once she learned that she would begin her judicial career on the criminal calendar at the Kent RJC, she began studying books and cases on criminal law and procedure.

What kind of judge will Andrea Darvas be? My off the cuff answer is “A darn good one, of course!” But naturally people want specifics. As the securities regulators say, past performance is no guarantee of future results, so I don’t know the specifics for sure, but I will seize this opportunity to speculate. Since I am the only lawyer in the State of Washington who is prohibited from appearing before her, none of you will ever be able to prove my predictions wrong because I won’t be with you in her courtroom. Furthermore, because she won’t be judging any of my cases, I have no motive to mislead you about what you should expect from Judge Darvas.

Note well this disclaimer: I am giving you my opinions here, and I am not speaking for Andrea Darvas. (If you know us, you know that we disagree about quite a number of things, and her take on some of these issues may be quite different from mine). But with those caveats, I will tell you some things you may want to know.

First, Andrea Darvas is scary smart. I found this out when we were working together on Michigan’s Moot Court competition our third year in law school. I was making a logical argument, “A therefore B therefore C.” She not only got to “C” before I said it, but she also saw “D” and “E” which I hadn’t even thought of yet. If you present her with a complex legal issue, expect that she will understand it quickly. If you’re not careful, she might understand it better than you!

Second, Andrea has an original and imaginative mind. When she was in practice, many lawyers sought her advice when one of their cases handed them a new kind of problem, and she usually could think of a solution. If you present her with a novel situation, one for which there is no useful precedent, she likely will find a way through the forest of competing interests to find the answer.

The third thing about Andrea is that she has always been the eye of the hurricane. All lawyers have days when everything is swirling around them, and they are feeling battered and beleaguered from every quarter. Andrea had them too, of course, but she always stayed calm. This was one of her secret weapons as a courtroom lawyer. She was so well prepared that she was hard to surprise, but if you did manage to surprise her, she would respond so calmly and correctly that you would think she had it planned all along.

What advice would I offer to lawyers appearing in her courtroom? First, freedom to choose includes the freedom to choose wisely or foolishly. I strongly suggest that you choose to be respectful toward everyone there. A lawyer who is rude to any clerk, bailiff, court reporter, or other court worker is a fool, and probably would be a fool skating on thin ice in Andrea’s courtroom.

Second, don’t pull stuff. You know what I mean. With all her courtroom experience, and as smart as she is, Andrea probably has seen, and seen through, whatever move you think you’re going to get away with, and you won’t. Thinking of asking a question you know is improper? Thinking of slipping in a reference to something she’s already excluded from evidence? Let’s just say I wouldn’t, if I were you.

Third, follow the case scheduling rules. We take deadlines seriously in our office, and I expect that Andrea would require the lawyers who appear before her to do likewise.

Fourth, be on time and be prepared. I know this is a lawyer clichŽ, but it is true. Andrea will be there on time and she will be ready to go, and you should be, too.

Conclusion. There obviously is a lot about Andrea Darvas that I haven’t told you. Part of the reason is space limitations, but part of it is, there are some things you just have to find out for

yourself. I will go out on a limb here and predict both that she is going to be an exceptionally good Superior Court Judge, and that ultimately her style in the courtroom will be a little different from what you may be accustomed to. You heard it here first.