Judge Suzanne Parisien Accountability Review
The Finding
Judge Suzanne Parisien has been evaluated twice by the King County Bar Association — the most rigorous and comprehensive attorney-based assessment of King County Superior Court judges available to the public. In 2020, she ranked #51 of 52 judges on composite score — and the one judge ranked below her received exactly 20 evaluations, the survey's bare minimum threshold for inclusion, compared to her 171. By any reasonable statistical standard that borderline result is disqualifiable, making her effectively last. In 2024, there is no such caveat: she ranked #49 of 49 — dead last, outright. Across both surveys, she failed to clear the "Very Good" threshold of 4.0 in a single category. Not one.
These are not the results of a handful of dissatisfied attorneys. A combined 269 licensed attorneys — each of whom certified, as sworn officers of the court, that they had personally appeared before the judicial officer being evaluated — evaluated her performance over an eight-year span. The pattern they documented is unambiguous, consistent, and statistically robust. Her weakest scores fall in Legal Decision Making and Integrity & Impartiality — the categories that go most directly to the core of what a judge is supposed to be.
The peer group improved between surveys. The bench-wide averages rose across every comparable category. Judge Parisien did not keep pace. In Demeanor, Temperament & Communication — the category that reflects what attorneys experience in her courtroom every single day — her score did not improve at all over nearly a decade. She finished last in that category in both surveys, with an identical score of 3.81.
The KCBA has conducted attorney surveys of King County Superior Court judges since 1948. Among all judges evaluated across the two most recent survey cycles — covering nearly a decade of documented attorney experience — no other judge owns the bottom like Parisien. By the most rigorous instrument available for evaluating this bench, Judge Parisien is the worst-documented performer in the survey's modern history.
This page presents the full record. The data is sourced directly from the KCBA's publicly published survey reports. The conclusions are the ones the data compels.
2020 KCBA Survey — The First Record
The 2020 KCBA Judicial Officer Survey covered 52 King County Superior Court judges, evaluated by 1,357 attorneys from a pool of more than 8,300 invited. Judge Parisien received 171 evaluations — well above the minimum threshold of 20 and substantially above the survey median. Her results cannot be dismissed as a thin or unrepresentative sample.
What those 171 attorneys found was this: she ranked in the bottom seven of 52 judges in every single category. Her lowest scores — and her worst relative rankings — fall precisely in Legal Decision Making and Integrity & Impartiality. These are not peripheral categories. They are the substance of what a judge does. Her best score, a 3.93 in Administrative Skills, still failed to clear the 4.0 threshold that separates "Acceptable" from "Very Good" — a threshold the all-judge average cleared in every category. The all-judge benchmark is computed as a response-weighted aggregate across all judge-level ratings — meaning judges with more evaluations carry proportionally more weight — which we consider the more reliable representation of bench-wide performance than a simple average of category means.
| Category | Parisien | Peer Avg | Gap | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Legal Decision Making | 3.60 | 4.08 | −0.48 | #48 of 52 |
| Integrity & Impartiality | 3.71 | 4.18 | −0.47 | #50 of 52 |
| Demeanor, Temp. & Communication | 3.81 | 4.27 | −0.46 | #49 of 52 |
| Administrative Skills | 3.93 | 4.24 | −0.31 | #46 of 52 |
| Composite (4-category avg) | 3.76 | 4.22 | −0.46 | #51 of 52 |
Composite = unweighted average of four category scores. The KCBA does not produce a composite score; this calculation is provided for comparative purposes using the most transparent and assumption-free method available. Source: 2020 KCBA Judicial Officer Survey, Tables 10 and 12–15.
Note on the #51 ranking: The one judge ranked below her (#52, Judge Steiner) received exactly 20 evaluations — the survey's bare minimum threshold for inclusion, compared to Parisien's 171. Her sample is 8.5 times larger. Steiner's result sits precisely on the survey's own reliability boundary — a threshold that exists because results below it are considered too unreliable to publish. Any reasonable statistician would treat a 20-evaluation result as statistically unreliable when compared against a 171-evaluation result. Setting Steiner aside on those grounds — which is entirely defensible — Judge Parisien is the worst-performing judge on the King County bench in 2020.
2020 — Category Scores vs. Peer Average
The chart below visualises the gap between her scores and the all-judge average in each category. The vertical marker indicates the 4.0 "Very Good" threshold. She falls short of it in all four categories. The peer group does not.
Tap to expand.
2020 — All 52 Judges Ranked by Composite Score
The ranking chart below places her result in full context. Her composite of 3.76 puts her second from last among 52 judges. As the footnote above makes clear, the judge ranked below her is there on the thinnest possible statistical basis.
Tap to expand.
2024 KCBA Survey — The Second Record
Four years later, a new survey. A new pool of attorneys. A new cohort of judges. The same result.
The 2023–2024 KCBA Judicial Officer Survey covered 49 judges evaluated by 1,057 attorneys. Judge Parisien received 98 evaluations — above both the survey mean of 72 and the median of 64. The 2024 survey added a fifth category, Virtual Appearances, reflecting the role remote hearings have played since 2020. She ranked last of 49 judges in that category as well.
In 2024, there is no borderline-inclusion judge ranked below her. There is no Steiner caveat. She ranked #49 of 49 — last place outright on composite, with no qualification required. Between 4.4% and 8.9% of evaluating attorneys selected "Unacceptable" — the harshest rating on the scale — in every single category. On Integrity & Impartiality, that figure was 8.9%. When "Below Expectations" ratings are added, between 14% and 20% of responding attorneys in each category found her performance at or below the second-lowest tier.
| Category | Parisien | Peer Avg | Gap | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Virtual Appearances New 2024 | 3.96 | 4.32 | −0.36 | #49 of 49 |
| Legal Decision Making | 3.70 | 4.15 | −0.45 | #47 of 49 |
| Integrity & Impartiality | 3.87 | 4.29 | −0.42 | #48 of 49 |
| Demeanor, Temp. & Communication | 3.81 | 4.31 | −0.50 | #49 of 49 |
| Administrative Skills | 3.99 | 4.29 | −0.30 | #45 of 49 |
| Composite (5-category avg) | 3.87 | 4.28 | −0.41 | #49 of 49 — Last |
Composite = unweighted average of five category scores. The KCBA does not produce a composite score; this calculation is provided for comparative purposes only. Source: 2023–2024 KCBA Judicial Officer Survey, Tables 10 and 12–16.
2024 — Category Scores vs. Peer Average
In 2024, her largest single deficit is in Demeanor, Temperament & Communication at −0.50 points — the category that most directly reflects what attorneys experience in her courtroom on a daily basis. She ranks last of 49 judges there. The gap in this area is wider in 2024 than it was in 2020.
Tap to expand.
2024 — All 49 Judges Ranked by Composite Score
In this chart, there is no asterisk, no borderline case below her, and no caveat. She is at the bottom. Every other judge evaluated by at least 20 attorneys in 2024 outperformed her on composite.
Tap to expand.
The two ranking charts above use identical color thresholds — red indicates a composite score below 3.90. In 2020, eight judges fell below that threshold and appear in red. In 2024, one judge does. The King County Superior Court bench improved measurably between surveys: the peer average rose from 4.22 to 4.28, and judges who were in the red tier in 2020 lifted themselves out of it by 2024. Judge Parisien is the sole exception. She is the only judge remaining below 3.90 on a bench that otherwise raised itself above that threshold. The 2024 chart is almost entirely green and blue. There is one red bar. It belongs to her.
The Eight-Year Pattern
Taken together, the two surveys tell a story that is more damning than either one alone. Between 2020 and 2024, the King County Superior Court bench improved. Bench-wide averages rose in every comparable category. The attorneys who evaluated the court in 2024 found it to be, overall, a better-performing bench than in 2020. Judge Parisien was not part of that improvement.
In three of the four comparable categories, her absolute scores did increase modestly — but the peer group improved at the same rate or faster, meaning her relative standing did not recover. She fell further behind on composite. And in the one category where attorneys most directly experience a judge — Demeanor, Temperament & Communication — her score did not move at all. It was 3.81 in 2020. It was 3.81 in 2024. The bench-wide average in that category rose from 4.27 to 4.31. The gap widened.
| Category | 2020 Score | 2024 Score | Score Change | 2020 Avg | 2024 Avg | Gap Change |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Legal Decision Making | 3.60 | 3.70 | +0.10 | 4.08 | 4.15 | Marginal improvement |
| Integrity & Impartiality | 3.71 | 3.87 | +0.16 | 4.18 | 4.29 | Marginal improvement |
| Demeanor & Communication | 3.81 | 3.81 | 0.00 | 4.27 | 4.31 | Gap widened |
| Administrative Skills | 3.93 | 3.99 | +0.06 | 4.24 | 4.29 | Essentially flat |
| 4-category Composite | 3.76 | 3.84 | +0.08 | 4.22 | 4.28 | Fell further behind |
improvement
improvement
widened
flat
behind
Source: 2020 and 2023–2024 KCBA Judicial Officer Surveys.
The Weighting Question
One objection sometimes raised against composite scores is that not all categories are equally important. The KCBA acknowledges this, which is why it does not publish a single composite score. The unweighted average used on this page is the most transparent and conservative method available — it makes no assumptions about which categories matter more.
But the weighting question is worth examining directly, because the answer runs entirely against Judge Parisien. Her two weakest scores — in absolute terms and by rank, in both surveys — are Legal Decision Making and Integrity & Impartiality. These are the categories that go most directly to the heart of what a judge does: the quality of her legal rulings and the integrity of her conduct on the bench. Her strongest category in both years is Administrative Skills — the most operational and least judicial of the four. Any weighting scheme that prioritised judicial substance over administrative function would produce a composite score worse than the unweighted average, not better. The method used here is the most favorable presentation of her record available.
The Steiner Question
In 2020, Judge Parisien ranked #51 of 52. The one judge ranked below her — Judge David Steiner at #52 — received exactly 20 evaluations. That is the survey's stated minimum threshold for inclusion. Not 25. Not 30. Exactly 20 — the narrowest possible passage through the survey's own reliability gate.
Judge Parisien received 171 evaluations. Her sample is 8.5 times larger than Steiner's. In a sample of 20, a single outlier evaluator — one attorney with a personal grievance, one unusually positive response, one data anomaly — can materially shift the composite score. In a sample of 171, that kind of individual variation is absorbed and corrected by the weight of the whole. The two results are not statistically comparable. Treating them as equal is not a defensible analytical position. Setting Steiner aside, Judge Parisien is the worst-performing judge on the King County bench in 2020. In 2024, this question does not arise at all, where she scores the worst and places last.
What This Record Means
King County Superior Court is a court of general jurisdiction. Its judges preside over felony criminal proceedings that determine whether individuals go to prison, major civil litigation involving significant financial interests, family law proceedings that determine the custody and welfare of children, and the most consequential legal matters the regional court system handles. The attorneys who evaluate these judges are licensed professionals with firsthand courtroom experience. Their assessments carry commensurate weight.
Across two independent surveys — conducted four years apart, by different pools of attorneys, evaluated against different cohorts of judges — the verdict on Judge Suzanne Parisien is the same. She ranked at or near the very bottom of every measured category, in every survey, without exception. She received a combined 269 attorney evaluations. That volume forecloses any argument that the results are a statistical accident, an outlier year, or the product of a thin and unrepresentative sample.
The conclusion the data compels is straightforward: there is no reading of this record in which Judge Parisien is not last. In 2020, she is last once a basic reliability filter is applied to the one judge ranked below her. In 2024, she is last outright — no filter required. Across both surveys, she is either the worst-performing judge on the King County Superior Court bench, or she is the worst once any reasonable standard of statistical reliability is applied. Those are the only two possibilities the data permits.
The full analysis reports are available for download below. They are provided as a resource for voters, attorneys, journalists, potential judicial candidates, and anyone with a professional or civic interest in the documented record of this court.
Download Full Reports
The analysis reports below were produced by JudgeAccount.com based on publicly available KCBA survey data. The official KCBA survey instruments are the primary sources underlying all findings on this page.
JudgeAccount.com Analysis Reports
Detailed breakdown of Judge Parisien's 2020 KCBA results across all four categories, including composite ranking among all 52 judges, the Steiner threshold analysis, and key findings.
Download PDFDetailed breakdown of Judge Parisien's 2024 KCBA results across all five categories, including her last-place composite ranking among all 49 evaluated judges and key findings.
Download PDFA comprehensive eight-year comparison covering both surveys, the weighting argument, the Steiner disqualification case, and the full trend analysis. The most complete document available.
Download PDFOfficial KCBA Source Documents
The findings on this page are derived entirely from the King County Bar Association's own published survey reports. Those primary source documents are hosted here to ensure permanent, stable access — the KCBA's own links to these reports are subject to expiry. All data cited on this page and in the analysis reports above can be verified directly against these documents.
The official King County Bar Association Judicial Officer Survey for King County Superior Court, published January 2020. Primary source for all 2020 findings on this page.
Download PDFThe official King County Bar Association Judicial Officer Survey for King County Superior Court, published May 2024. Primary source for all 2024 findings on this page.
Download PDFWashington State Commission on Judicial Conduct
The Washington State Commission on Judicial Conduct (CJC) is the independent agency responsible for investigating complaints of judicial misconduct and enforcing the Code of Judicial Conduct. The Commission can admonish, reprimand, or censure a judge, and may recommend suspension or removal to the Washington Supreme Court.
Two consecutive surveys showing sustained last-place rankings — backed by 269 certified attorney evaluations across nearly a decade — represent the kind of documented, multi-year pattern the CJC is empowered to examine. If you have personal experience appearing before Judge Parisien that you believe reflects a violation of the Code of Judicial Conduct, you may file a complaint directly with the Commission online.
Visit the Washington State CJCThe Electoral Path
Judge Parisien's current term ends on January 9, 2029. The filing deadline for the 2028 King County Superior Court election falls in approximately mid-May 2028, based on the consistent historical pattern of King County judicial election cycles. The primary is scheduled for August 2028, with the general election in November 2028.
Judge Parisien has run unopposed in her last two election cycles — not because King County lacks qualified attorneys capable of replacing her, but because incumbency advantage has historically been presumed to be prohibitive. This record changes that presumption entirely. The empirical case documented on this page — two surveys, nearly a decade of documented attorney experience, 269 evaluations, last place in every meaningful measure — is an operational asset that any qualified challenger can carry into a campaign. It is sourced from the KCBA's own published data. It is verifiable. It is devastating.
The window is open. The record is here. If you are an attorney licensed in Washington State who has appeared before King County Superior Court and believes you could serve this community with the integrity and competence this bench demands — this page exists for you.