I am a game player. Whether it is cards, board games, or even playground games like hide and seek, I am all in. The idea that you play, you have rules, you compete and there is a conclusion to the game is very satisfying. In many ways, you can be lost in the moment of playing and forget about the many worries you may have.
When I was in high school in Alaska, as you can imagine during long winter days, pre-streaming, and watching MTV videos on repeat, my friends and I did not have many activities to entertain us. We often created games and made rules on the fly to set the bumpers of how we played. We invented ice-tackle basketball to be played in the middle of winter on an outdoor basketball court covered with ice. We played indoor whiffle ball with bases earned by where you hit the ball, and of course, an automatic out if you broke a glass tchotchke (which may or may not have happened). We also played traditional games with some rule modifications to make them more interesting like Monopoly. In one instance, we played Monopoly with some additional “ways” to earn money and one of my friends was the banker. After playing for several hours and players making “side” deals to keep the money flowing, we learned that our friend the banker was self-dealing from the beginning!
I am sure many of you played games likes these as well as organized games in your youth. These games, and the rules we abide by shape our experience and understanding of fair play. On the “playground”, rules were often debated, playground lawyers made spontaneous erudite interpretations, and rules would be modified by consensus. Many of you know this dynamic and were perhaps the playground rules interpreter. Now as lawyers and judges, we abide by the rule of law to ensure our system is fair. Just like in our youth, we play by certain rules, and when we consider them imbalanced or biased, we adjust them to make the system more fair. This process is fundamental to procedural fairness and providing confidence to the public of the legitimacy of our system. In many parts of the world, this rule of law does not exist and whoever has more money or power prevails. Or, in other parts of the world, the rule of law is so opaque and state-controlled that no one really has any confidence in the outcomes of the court.
Although we create rules of law to be fair and accessible, there are many examples of our rules being biased, unfair, or barriers to access to our courts. As a court, we are constantly reviewing our rules, specifically, our local rules to ensure attorneys and parties can access our courts. We have rules committees locally and statewide that meet regularly to do the painstaking work of reviewing every comma and preposition to accomplish our intent. Our committees are experts in assessing the impact rules have on our procedure and they balance the occasionally competing values of access, predictability, and order.
As you may have heard, there are proposed state rules open for comment. One set of rules that we in King County are paying careful attention to is the flexibility to conduct remote proceedings for various court proceedings. Coming out of the pandemic, we have found these innovations in using remote technologies to be of great benefit. It has increased court access, increased juror participation, decreased failures to appear, and created efficiencies that allow attorneys, parties, and witnesses to save travel and time costs.
We at the Court encourage you as practitioners and also experts in how these rules are applied to comment on the rules to give a full picture of the impacts these innovations have on the practice of law. As an example, we are now able to summons 10x the number of jurors because they initially appear virtually and as a result we rarely exhaust our panel of jurors for a jury pool. For those of you who remember the days when you were sent out to a trial courtroom but then were told there were no more jurors and the trial will be delayed by a few days, this innovation will ring true.
We have welcomed two new judicial colleagues, Judge Nick Straley and Judge Angela Kaake. Our third new judicial officer is Judge Monica Kaup Cary. Since 2022, Judge Cary has served as a family court commissioner with our court. In this role, she presided over numerous family law matters, including family law motions, civil protection orders, truancy, and at-risk youth in need of services. From 2013 to 2018, she also served as a King County family law commissioner pro tem. Prior to her current role as a judicial officer, Judge Cary worked for over 18 years at the DuBois Cary Law Group, becoming an owner and partner in 2010. At DuBois Cary Law Group, she represented clients in all aspects of family law proceedings, with a practice emphasis on complex custody and financial matters. She also assisted in managing the firm’s operations and employees. Her previous work experience includes serving as a Pierce County prosecuting attorney in the criminal law division, and as a clerk to the presiding family court judge in the Oregon Circuit Court, 4th Judicial District. Judge Cary earned her bachelor’s degree from Franklin and Marshall College and her law degree from the Northwestern School of Law of Lewis and Clark College. She is a former board member of the South Asian Bar Association of Washington and volunteer with API Chaya.
We are excited to have Judge Cary join our bench and she will be a tremendous judicial officer for our bench and community because of her intelligence, compassion, and collegiality.
As always, we welcome feedback and conversation on how our court can serve the King County Bar and the members of our community. Please reach out to further that conversation.
