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

1,797 chars

a risk" in persisting in his efforts to introduce additional evidence of alleged age

discrimination.

As a direct result of Lodis's insistence on introducing evidence that unfairly

left the jury with the implication that Shenk was biased against older workers,

Judge Heller reversed his prior ruling mid-trial and allowed Corbis to introduce

the age discrimination verdict in order to "protect" Corbis against any unfair
conclusion that Shenk had engaged in age discrimination. Specifically

recognizing that Lodis had introduced "quite a bit of evidence regarding age
within the context of the retaliation claim," Judge Heller reasoned that admission

of the prior jury verdict was necessary because Corbis was entitled "to be
protected from . . . [jury] 'shortcuts'. . . [inferring] that Mr. Shenk engaged in age
discrimination." In order to remedy any possible jury confusion resulting from the

introduction of the age discrimination evidence, the trial court gave the jury a
limiting instruction emphasizing that the focus of the trial was Lodis's retaliation
claim, not collateral allegations of age discrimination.

The trial court's ultimate ruling permitting Corbis to present evidence of the

first jury's verdict, in order to rebut Lodis's created implication that Shenk was an
"ageist," was both prudent and even-handed. The challenged ruling, which was
consistent with the "open door" rule, was not an abuse of the trial court's

discretion.

-18
             
No. 72342-1-1/19

Lodis next contends that the trial court erred by invoking the law of the

case doctrine to prevent him from presenting evidence with the goal of relitigating

the second jury's breach of fiduciary duty verdict. Relatedly, he contends that