Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 723421.pdf

Citation: Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 723421.pdf
Jurisdiction: Washington (state)
Source verification: official_capture_completeness_unverified
Original Source: https://www.courts.wa.gov/opinions/pdf/723421.pdf ↗

Related Parts of This Source

Full Text

1,602 chars

During discovery, Corbis . . . discovered that Lodis failed to
record any vacation time in the payroll system during his tenure, but
accepted a payout of $41,155 plus a 401(k) match of $1,235 for
329 hours of accrued but unused vacation time. Based on this
evidence, Corbis counterclaimed against Lodis for breach of
fiduciary duty, unjust enrichment, and fraudulent misrepresentation.
At trial, Mary Tomblinson, Corbis's payroll coordinator and HR
system analyst, testified that Lodis used at least 35 more vacation
days than he was entitled to. A summary of her analysis of those
records was also admitted into evidence.
Before the first trial, the trial court refused to decide as a
matter of law whether Lodis owed a fiduciary duty, instead leaving
the issue for the jury. The jury found that Corbis had not engaged
in age discrimination. It found in favor of Lodis on the unjust
enrichment and fraud counterclaims. However, the jury found that
Lodis owed a fiduciary duty and breached that duty, but awarded
no damages. The trial court granted a new trial on Corbis's breach
of fiduciary duty counterclaim based on this incongruous result of
liability but no damages.
Before the second trial, Corbis moved for partial summary
judgment to establish that Lodis was an officer with fiduciary duties.
In its reply brief to that motion, Corbis introduced corporate
resolutions indicating Lodis's status as an officer. Based on this
evidence, Judge Heller found as a matter of law that Lodis was an
officer.

3-
             
No. 72342-1-1/4