Comment #: WA1663
Rating:7.5
Comments:
Judge Eadie has a wonderful courtroom demeanor. For courtesy, he is excellent. He is the type of person you'd love to have as your next door neighbor.

As our trial judge, however, I was disappointed. He did not read evidence. Seemed confused about some fairly fundamental laws. Was (in my opinion) overly deferential to the other party. And actually fell asleep on the Bench during cross examination of one of the parties.

He may have been more on top of things in his younger days, but my experience at trial with him left me feeling that perhaps he should have retired earlier.

Part of his ruling was remanded after Appeal, but parties should not have to incur the additional expense and turmoil of going to the Court of Appeals to correct errors at trial.

Comment #: WA1594
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Completely disregarder foreign state court of law and case filed with, violated my citizenship rights, violated the law of child support in WA, separated children from their father, abusive attitude to foreign nationality. Defined child support and alimony which was absolutely illegal, $2000 child support and $2000 alimony while my income was less then $2000! Shell never be allowed to be a judge.

Comment #: WA1277
Rating:9.7
Comments:
I had a great first impression of the judge at my pretrial though it didn't turn out for my good as well as the good of my children. I appreciated the Judge's humble and professional dispensing of matters. However, my expectation of a pretrial (from my reading on the web) was different.

Comment #: WA1228
Rating:1.0
Comments:
In family law, it's like the 1950s again, eg: anti-divorce, tender years doctrine, gender roles, ignores professional analysis and testimony, and all around outdated. Blatantly unconstitutional elements of his judgement were reversed on appeal, which speaks to his understanding/application of the law. Agreed to comment on WA #188. May have a white knight complex.

Comment #: WA1186
Rating:1.6
Comments:
Eadie is a wolf in sheep's clothing. He pretends to be good, but he is 100% pro-prosecution and even will exactly quote prosecution's evidence less words to issue his decision. Somebody impeach him please.

Comment #: WA651
Rating:1.0
Comments:
This judge failed to admit key testimony, and pronounced an excessively harsh sentence, in spite of massive community support for a reduced sentence. He was overly moralistic, and caved to the political whims of the prosecution.

Comment #: WA414
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Eadie is terrible. He should have recused himself from a case in which we are defendants -- due to conflict of interest. Instead, he remained silent and has issued a series of illogical and unjust rulings and ruined our case -- he has ensured the jury will not hear the facts and the party he favors will win.

For more details, read our recusal motion at mhdecoursey.com, Dkt. 196, filed on 8/9/2012.

Some details:
We were involved in a lawsuit against Windermere Real Estate from 2006 through 2011. While that case was still in the Seattle courthouse, we dismissed our attorneys (Lane Powell) for improper conduct and carving up the judgment to Windermere's advantage. The law firm sued us and the case was assigned to Judge Eadie. That suit has been going on now for about 11 months.

We have recently learned that Judge Eadie's wife is a Windermere Real Estate Broker. According to the Public Disclosure Commission, the Eadie family has received more than $289,000 in Windermere Commissions in the last 9 years, and possibly twice that much, given the PDC's range method of reporting income.

In all that time, with hundreds of mentions of Windermere in the pleadings and motions, Judge Eadie has not recused himself. His close affiliation with the controversial company has been a closely guarded secret. He has denied every one of our motions and granted all of our opponents', save one. He has recently dismissed all our counterclaims and defenses.

Comment #: WA211
Rating:8.8
Comments:
I had an oral arg before Judge Eadie; an appeal of an administrative decision. He was laid back (even though opposing counsel was 25 mins late), he had read both briefs, and had a comprehensive knowledge of the record. I was impressed by his professionalism and preparedness. He decided in our favor and seemed to be interested in worker's rights.

Comment #: WA188
Rating:1.2
Comments:
In family law, deeply religious and moralistic to the point of ignoring the law. Any hint of living in sin or otherwise not following a conservative religious lifestyle and that party is doomed.

Comment #: WA180
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Judge Eadie's decision in one matter in particular completely defied logic, law, convention. Did he owe someone a favor? There is no way decent people can defend against what Judge Eadie rules in favor of. Judge Eadie's justice must be an indication or projection of his own internal standards or values, that is the only explanation for why he rules in favor of the wrongdoers.