Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850661.pdf

Related Parts of This Source

1,721 chars

citation. The trial court granted this motion and ruled that SPD could not introduce

7
For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.
No. 85066-1-I

“[t]he results of investigations (findings, citations, non-citations, etc.)” or “opinions

or conclusions of law contained in an investigation report.”

At trial, Sgt. Hockett’s treating physician, Dr. Nathan Parker, testified that

Sgt. Hockett had suffered permanent lung damage from his exposure to car

exhaust in the West Garage. Dr. Parker diagnosed Sgt. Hockett with Reactive

Airway Disease (RAD), a condition similar to asthma in which a person develops

breathing problems from inhaling an airborne irritant. After Dr. Parker testified,

SPD sought to introduce previously undisclosed opinions of its expert toxicologist,

Dr. Brent Burton, rebutting Dr. Parker’s RAD diagnosis and referencing Sgt.

Hockett’s military-related exposures. The trial court granted Sgt. Hockett’s motion

to exclude this testimony.

Before submitting the case to the jury, Sgt. Hockett split his third claim under

the SMC into two separate claims numbered claim 3 and claim 4. The new claim

3 alleged that SPD retaliated against him by passing him over for promotions and

assignments, and the new claim 4 alleged that SPD retaliated against him by

creating a hostile work environment. The jury found SPD liable on claim 1

(negligence), claim 2 (failure to accommodate under WLAD), and claim 4 (hostile

work environment under SMC). 1 The jury awarded damages of $175,000 on claim

1, $150,000 on claim 2, and $1,000,000 on claim 4. Thereafter, SPD filed various

post-trial motions, which the trial court largely denied. The trial court awarded