Skip to main content

Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 701282.pdf

Citation
Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 701282.pdf
Jurisdiction
Washington (state)
Source verification
official_capture_completeness_unverified

Full Text

1,746 chars
for retaliation under the WLAD, RCW 49.60.210 and .030.

NSI moved for summary judgment, arguing that "the Washington Law

Against Discrimination (WLAD) simply does not apply to alleged discrimination

solely between two independent contractors, therefore there can be no retaliation

as a matter of law and plaintiffs' case should be dismissed." The court denied

NSI's motion, and a bench trial followed. On February 21, 2013, the court

entered findings of fact and conclusions of law that held NSI liable for retaliation

3 Graham testified on cross-examination that if Franssen and Sleeth had
told him about the incident and said, "[A]nd because of that, we've had enough of
Currier and we want to fire him," Graham would not have advised termination
because "the issue is not Currier, it's Billy Howell."
4 This also terminated the contract and any relationship between NSI and
Currier, dba American Container Express Inc..
             
NO. 70128-2-1/5

within the meaning of RCW 49.60.210. The court awarded Currier economic loss
damages of $301,604.00, noneconomic damages of $25,000.00, attorney fees of
$265,500.00, and costs of $8,864.69.

NSI appeals.5

STANDARD OF REVIEW

This court reviews a trial court's findings and conclusions to determine if

substantial evidence supports them and if those findings support the court's
conclusions of law.6 Substantial evidence is evidence sufficient to persuade a

fair-minded, rational person of the truth of the matter asserted.7 The trial court is
in a better position to make credibility determinations, and if substantial evidence
exists, this court will not substitute its judgment for that of the trial court on

appeal.8