Eugster v. State
Annotate this CasePetitioner Stephen Eugster filed suit to challenge Washington's process of electing appellate court judges and the court's procedure of assigning cases to three-judge panels. He argued that the process violated the state's constitution. In particular, Petitioner argued that the election process violates the "all elections shall be free and equal" clause of Article I, Section 19. The trial court found that Petitioner failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted, and dismissed his case. Upon careful consideration of the state's constitution's history, as well as the legislative and case history pertaining to Washington's election of judges and the process by which cases are heard by the appellate courts, the Supreme Court affirmed the trial court's decision.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.