You are here: Home Candidate Evaluations Previous Ratings 2010 2010 Judicial Candidate Ratings
Document Actions

2010 Judicial Candidate Ratings

 

JUDICIAL CANDIDATE RATINGS  (CONTESTED RACES ONLY)

 

Supreme Court | District: NE | District: Shoreline | District: SE | District: SW | Seattle Municipal Court 

Position                         

Candidate                    

Rating              

More Info

State Supreme Court

Justice Pos. 1

Stan Rumbaugh
Jim Johnson ^ ~

Very Good
Very Good

Questionnaire; Web
Questionnaire; Web

State Supreme Court

Justice Pos. 6

Bryan Chushcoff
Charlie Wiggins
Richard Sanders ~ 

Very Good
Outstanding
Good

Questionnaire; Web
Questionnaire; Web
Questionnaire; Web

Dist. Court Northeast

Judge Pos. 6

John L. O'Brien
Michael Finkle~

Very Good
Good

Questionnaire; Web
Questionnaire; Web

Dist. Court Northeast

Judge Pos. 7

Donna Tucker
Larry Mitchell
Ketu Shah 

Outstanding
Very Good
Outstanding

Questionnaire; Web
Questionnaire; Web
Questionnaire; Web

Dist. Court Shoreline

Judge Pos. 2

Marcine Anderson ~
Dennis J. McCurdy

Outstanding
Very Good

Questionnaire; Web
Questionnaire; Web

Dist. Court Southeast

Judge Pos. 2

Darrell E. Phillipson ~
David Meyer 

Outstanding
Very Good 

Questionnaire; Web
Questionnaire; Web

Dist. Court Southeast

Judge Pos. 6

Matt Williams
David Tracy 

Very Good
Very Good

Questionnaire; Web
Questionnaire; Web

Dist. Court Southwest

Judge Pos. 6 

Susan Mahoney
Judith R. Eiler ~

Outstanding
Adequate   

Questionnaire; Web
Questionnaire; Web

Seattle Municipal Court

Judge Pos. 1 

Edsonya Charles ~
Ed McKenna 

Adequate
Very Good

Questionnaire; Web
Questionnaire; Web

Seattle Municipal Court

Judge Pos. 6  

Karen Donohue
Michael Hurtado ~ 

Very Good
Good

Questionnaire; Web
Questionnaire; Web


Symbol Key

~  Incumbent | #  Declined to Interview | +  Unable to Interview | %  Declined to Participate
^  Unable to Participate | *  Unable to Contact

 

About the Municipal League Ratings

The ratings are not endorsements. They assess each candidate's potential to be effective in office and ability to serve the community.

  • Outstanding – Has made numerous outstanding contributions requiring skills related to the office, is a path-finding and respected leader, brings knowledge and creativity to issues facing the office.
  • Very Good – Makes significant contributions, is a skilled builder of consensus, inspires confidence in the way he/she would serve, is thorough and attentive to issues.
  • Good – Has been active and effective in many roles, is capable of moving people to productive action, has strong record of participation in problem solving, shows satisfactory commitment to tackling issues.
  • Adequate – Has a record of participation and interest, is effective on specific issues, has provoked questions about suitability as an office holder, will need significant time/energy to fill gaps in knowledge.
  • Not Qualified – Doesn't appear engaged, has a record that casts doubt on ability to be productive, hasn't demonstrated ability to deal with responsibilities of office, has narrow focus, inflexible attitude or is otherwise troubling.


Other Voter Resources for Judicial Candidates:

 


Plone.org web by NPower Seattle