Slog

News & Arts

Line Out

Music & the City
at Night

« Now Closed: Habesha | The Benefits of the Peruvian Prison… »

Monday, October 8, 2012

2012 Governor Gregoire Has Not Endorsed King County Superior Court Candidate Sue Parisien, and Has Told Parisien to Stop Implying Otherwise

Posted by Eli Sanders on Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 12:14 PM

In her voters' guide statement, King County Superior Court candidate Sue Parisien is offering a testimonial from Governor Chris Gregoire to support her campaign against incumbent Superior Court Judge Christopher Washington:

I'm told this Gregoire statement used to appear on Parisien's web site too, and that Parisien has spoken of it at candidate forums. Problem is, this statement comes from a 2005 letter of recommendation that Gregoire wrote for Parisien (who used to work as an assistant attorney general). In other words, the statement is more than seven years old and was not written with the specific intention of helping Parisien in her current run for Superior Court judge.

Kelly Evans, spokesperson for Governor Gregoire, tells me the governor has made no endorsement in this race.

"I asked for the language to be taken off [Parisien's] web site," Evans says. "It implied an endorsement that doesn't exist."

What about Parisien's blurb in the voters' pamphlet, which is going out to all King County voters and still has Gregoire's statement in it?

"Suffice it to say, had we known about the language in the voters' pamphlet beforehand, we would have asked for it to be left out," Evans says. "Again, it implies an endorsement that doesn't exist."

I've asked Parisien for comment and will update this post when I hear from her.

FacebookShare

Comments (15) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment

Perhaps Gov. Gregoire doesn't want to be associated with someone who's history includes defending the state against lawsuits from abused foster kids, and currently defending Zurich (parent company of Farmers) against paying things like, oh, I don't know...claims that their insureds pay a premium for?

Posted by michaelp on October 8, 2012 at 12:57 PM

As someone who has voted for Gregoire three times, I still have to ask: Does anybody really want to tout that endorsement?

Posted by Asparagus! on October 8, 2012 at 1:29 PM

@1 - Could you be more simplistic and utterly reactionary without having any facts whatsoever? First of all, it would be kind of hard for Gregoire to disassociate herself from defending lawsuits against the State brought by abused foster kids, since that was her statutory responsibility as former Attorney General (and Sue Parisien's former employer). And second, not all lawyers who are employed by insurance companies are coverage lawyers trying to get the insurance company out of paying claims. Some insurance company attorneys actually defend policyholders (i.e., the people who pay premiums) from lawsuits brought against them by other people. Having an attorney represent and defend you in lawsuits is one of the things you pay for when you hand that premium over to your insurance company. I'm with @2.

Posted by ThinkFirstPlease on October 8, 2012 at 3:08 PM

@3 - As someone who has worked on the other side of AAG's that defend the state re: abused foster kids, I have never seen one brag about it the way Ms. Parisien does.

As for her work for Zurich - that is what she does. She is staff counsel for large claims (over $250k) against Zurich, per her own biography. I'm not being reactionary, I'm stating facts about what it is she does.

Zurich/Farmers is rated second worst of all insurance companies re: claims handling in the U.S. by Consumer Reports (Allstate beats them out). Sue Parisien's job is to defend the company when that happens, whether it be first party, third party, or assignment claims.

The incumbent isn't perfect, either, but doesn't carry that baggage. He carries baggage of preferring alternatives to incarceration to jailing kids.

Tough choice, I know.

Posted by michaelp on October 8, 2012 at 7:09 PM

I wouldn't read too much into this. Gov. Gregoire does not deny the quoted passage is a statement made by the Governor. Nor does she say her statement is untrue. This is important because we should expect our Judges to have high quality legal experience, work hard, and do high quality legal work. Remember also, the Governor was Attorney General before she became Governor. So she would have been the candidate's employer. It is important to know how Parisien's efforts were viewed by her bosses, all of whom are elected officials.

Posted by Baked Bean on October 8, 2012 at 7:15 PM

@4 - sounds to me like you're an opposing counsel with a grudge. I see absolutely nothing in her bio "bragging" about defending cases brought by abused foster children, and her bio specifically states that she defends cases in excess of $250 K against "individuals and businesses," i.e. insured policyholders.

Posted by ThinkFirstPlease on October 8, 2012 at 9:22 PM

I agree with @5. This actually seems like the spineless political B.S. that is typical of Gregoire. Gregoire's not denying the substance of her comments about Parisien's performance, so what's the issue? Has something changed since 2005 when she made these statements? I have voted for Gregoire as a choice between two "lesser equals" every election, but I am so glad she will be stepping down this year.

Posted by PoliticalBS on October 8, 2012 at 9:38 PM

michaelp, your view about who insurance defense counsel represent is way off base, and extremely slanted.Your attack on her is unfair and looks personal. As a lawyer you should know better. Insurance defense counsel---whether for Zurich or Pemco or any other insurer, typically represent policyholders who have been sued, sometimes even for frivolous claims. Insurance defense counsel's duties are to their client the policyholder. As you well know, the policyholder could be you, your neighbor, or the mom and pop pizza shop down the street. That doesn't make the in house lawyer a bad person, a bad lawyer, or a bad candidate for judge. If anything, this experience often makes the in house lawyer more qualified for the bench because they have represented real people who often are unfamiliar with the judicial system. I've known dozens of insurance defense attorneys who are quite liberal and progressive, even though most of their fees are paid by insurers. The same applies with government lawyers, like an assistant attorney general--the position Parisien held prior to her time at Zurich. Remember, government attorney work is a public service. I looked at Parisien's website. She isn't just a lawyer. She is a mother and active on all kinds of causes in her community. Those experiences helps her candidacy too. So don't be so quick to smear her with your beef with insurance companies. It's a job and she apparently does it well. The best I can tell the incumbent does not do his job so well. It's probably time to replace him

Posted by Baked Bean on October 8, 2012 at 9:55 PM

The issue here is not that Gov. Gregoire denies ever making these comments. The issue is that Parisien is using this quote and others from Gregoire to imply that she does have the Governor's endorsement for the current race (rather than the quote being just a comment on her work from 2005). This is unethical and deceptive to voters. This content also continues to exist on Parisien's Facebook page, presumably because Gregoire's spokesperson didn't explicitly ask that it be removed from that location in addition to her website. It's extremely disheartening to see a candidate for a judicial position demonstrate this kind of behavior.

Posted by Coast_to_Coast on October 8, 2012 at 9:57 PM

@9 - What causes you, or Eli Sanders for that matter, to claim that using these statements by Gregoire "implies" that she has given an endorsement. As far as I'm concerned, unless something has changed, if these statements by Gregoire remain true, the candidate should be able to use them. Gregoire trying to "take them back" because it's politically helpful to do so right now (who knows what godforsaken political favor she owes the incumbent idiot Judge Washington) is what looks deceptive and misleading to me.

Posted by PoliticalBS on October 8, 2012 at 10:09 PM

#10 is spot on.I'm all for vetting a candidate, but Eli is straining for a story that's not here. Someone who works hard, and does her job well, and receives accolades for her efforts, should be able to tell whoever she wants about those professional accolades, and the voters, have a right to know about those accolades. The only reason people are attacking this candidate for her stellar accolades is that their candidate--Judge Washington, has had very poor reviews by a large block of attorneys who work before him. See Dominic Holden's articles about Judge Washington.

Posted by Baked Bean on October 9, 2012 at 6:51 AM

@6, 8 - FWIW, I have no particular grudge against Ms. Parisien, and I'm certain she's a good lawyer. Having worked all sides of civil law (plaintiff, assigned defense, insurance company defense, coverage work), I agree that there is something to be commended about having a solid understanding of insurance law, and application of policies with respect to claims. It could be a rare treat for this bench.

But civil defense counsel, in its nature, is designed to defend either people or businesses that injure others. That is what Sue Parisien has done, with a brief period working for Nordstrom.

The question for our judges is simple: Do we want someone who supports corporations over people? Who has a long history working to deny recovery to injured children?

We have a bench in King County that, in my experience, tends to support people over corporations, consumers over companies. I wouldn't say that Ms. Parisien is a bad person - folks who work in defense are good people. I'm saying she has a strong history of conservative lawyering, and I'm not altogether sure I want to be electing a conservative judge to the King County Superior Court.

Posted by michaelp on October 9, 2012 at 7:46 AM

@12 "Civil defense counsel, in its nature, is designed to defend either people or business that injure others." Excuse me, but do you actually believe that every lawsuit that is filed has merit? Sometimes the people and businesses who have been sued haven't done anything wrong, and often the supposedly injured are exaggerating what happened to them for a quick buck. You've obviously never been on the receiving end of this, but if you were I'll bet your view of defense counsel, whom you apparently view as non-humans, would change. Furthermore, defending someone in a lawsuit is neither "liberal" nor "conservative" - anyone can sue or be sued, regardless of political belief. You're projecting way too much onto someone just by virtue of the fact that she worked on one side of civil litigation as opposed to the other.

Posted by AuntBee on October 9, 2012 at 8:14 AM

I guess I'm a bit confused in the difference between Judge Washington's former employment history from Ms. Parisiens. Judge Washington's reelection page indicates he worked at a large firm and "handled insurance defense litigation, plaintiff personal injury cases, and labor negotiations on behalf of municipal clients". Sounds like he too also represented many corporations in his practice.

Posted by JustAGirlFromKent on October 11, 2012 at 8:31 PM

Baked Bean shame on you. Chris Washington has not had bad reviews from a large number of attorneys who appeared before him. Until the prosecutors conspired to low rank him he was well rated, always higher than 50% of the other King Co judges and often in the top quarter. Then prosecutors who were unhappy his thoughtful, careful sentences to juvenile drug offenders weren't the maximums they demanded figured out how they could, unethically, get back at him. 20 prosecutors gave Washington the lowest possible rating on every score on the King Co.
Bar Assn poll on judges. Had they simply criticized him for not being harsh enough, that would have been decent. But the didn't limit themselves to that. Even on scores like judicial temperament, that is does the judge listen to everyone who comes before him, not intimidating them, not cutting them off before he make his decision, they gave him the lowest score. I have been in Washington's courtroom. He is one of the kindest, most patient judges in the county. But to damn Washington, the prosecutors conspired to rate him at the bottom on even that trait.

Now that the word is out the Seattle Times, the Progressive Voters group and many many others have changed their endorsements away from his opponent and to Chris. He is an excellent judge. He has been subject to a shameful hate campaign. Let's hope out democratic system can see through the false negative campaign and re-elect a judge we can all be proud of.

Posted by jfdevleming@yahoo.com on October 30, 2012 at 4:15 PM