Eugster v. Washington Supreme Court Justices

Posted On Apr 13 2020 by

Today I filed an Application for Leave to File — complaint against the individual justices of the Washington Supreme Court. The issue is whether the WSBA an integrated association of lawyers, limited practice officers, and limited license legal technicians violates the holding in Janus v, AFSCME. This case is different from the petition for writ of certiorari of  Jarchow v. Wisconsin State Bar Association now before the United States Supreme Court Docket Doc_4_Application for Leave Doc_4-1 2020_04_13_Draft of Complaint_Case 13A Doc_5 Motion to Disqualify Judge Doc_5-1_Declaration ISOM Motion to Disqualify Judge  


Caruso v. WSBA, FRCP Rule 60 Motions, Summary Dismissal // Petition for Rehearing En Banc

Posted On Apr 13 2020 by

The bar association filed a 9th Circuit R. 3-6 motion.  I have responded with a Petition for Rehearing En Banc.  Doc_17_Petition for Re Hearing En Banc


Fleck v. Wetch

Posted On Feb 29 2020 by

The Supreme Court will consider the new Fleck Petition for Cert.  It has been distributed for conference this coming Friday, March 6, 2020. https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/19-670.html Here is a Geo. Will column on February 28, 2020 — https://www.bozemandailychronicle.com/supreme-court-s-fine-janus-decision-merits-encore/article_d2dd2ba3-75f0-5566-826a-9f91ba00f470.html?utm_medium=social&utm_source=email&utm_campaign=user-share


Fleck v. Wetch, 8th Circuit Order, Briefing and Argument

Posted On Jan 12 2019 by

No. 16-1564. JUDGE ORDER: On December 3, 2018, the Supreme Court vacated this court’s judgment and remanded the matter for further consideration in light of Janus v. State, County and Municipal Employees, 138 S.Ct. 2448 (2018). On January 9, 2019, the court reopened this case. The parties are directed to file supplemental briefs addressing the issues on remand. Appellant’s brief is due February 15, 2019, and appellees’ brief is due March 15, 2019. Appellant’s reply brief, if any, is due March 29, 2018. The principal supplemental briefs shall not exceed 10,000 words, and appellant’s reply brief shall not exceed 5,000 words. It …


Arizona Bar Petition: Separate Regulatory and Trade Association Functions

Posted On Jan 9 2019 by

Dear Friends and Colleagues: Yesterday, the Goldwater Institute filed a petition asking the Arizona Supreme Court to amend the rules governing the State Bar of Arizona to separate the regulatory and trade association functions along the lines adopted by the Nebraska Supreme Court and comparable to bar reform legislation sponsored by Rep. Anthony Kern in the Arizona Legislature the past few years. In addition, the petition asks for the implementation of heightened financial transparency requirements via a detailed and independent annual audit of the Arizona Bar’s expenditures. A copy of the rule petition is attached. Also see the explanatory links …


Washington Supreme Court and the Bar Structure Work Group

Posted On Jan 3 2019 by

The Washington Supreme Court exercising its power over the WSBA and members under GR 12.2 has created a Bar Structure Work Group. The court neglects to mention Eugster v. WSBA and Justices of the Supreme Court.  The case is on appeal to the 9th Circuit, all briefs have been filed.


Eugster v. WSBA and Justices of the Washington Supreme Court

Posted On Dec 9 2018 by

Pleadings on appeal: Doc_6_ Opening_Brief_and_Appendix Doc_13_Answering Brief Doc_16_Reply Appellant


Supreme Court Workgroup and Fleck v. Wetch

Posted On Dec 7 2018 by

Members of the Spokane County Bar Association, December 7, 2018, from Steve Eugster* The Washington Supreme Court recently created the Supreme Court Workgroup to Review WSBA Structure.[1] The duration of the workgroup is six to eight weeks with meetings every three to four weeks.  The first meeting will be in January 2019. It will be held at WSBA offices in Seattle and will be open to the public. The workgroup will undertake a “comprehensive review of the structure of the bar in light of recent case law of the First Amendment and antitrust implications for bar associations.”  Id. Recent case law is Fleck v. …


Case IX Prefiling Motion of WSBA

Posted On Sep 29 2018 by

WSBA Motion for Prefiling Order The attorneys for the WSBA Defendants have filed a “prefiling” motion.  The purpose is to compel Eugster to prefile certain pleadings for court approval before they may be filed. Trial Docket doc_61 Motion_Prefiling Order doc_62_Declaration Flevaris Doc_63_Response to Motion_Pre-Filing Doc_64_Motion to Disqualify doc_65_Order Denying Motion Disqualify Doc-66 Reply Doc_67_Order re No Disqualification Doc_68_Order re Pre-filing Doc_69_Notice of Appeal 9th Circuit, Opening Brief is due October 12, 2018 Doc_6_ Opening_Brief_and_Appendix Doc_13_Answering Brief Doc_16_Reply Appellant


Janus v. AFSCME

Posted On Jul 8 2018 by

It looks like Janus v. AFSCME may have direct application to the issue of whether the Washington Supreme Court/ WSBA  (see General Rule 12.2) meets exacting scrutiny under the First Amendment. See also, Arnold Fleck v. North Dakota Bar Association (Wetch) petition for writ of certiorari.  Go here.