Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850661.pdf

Citation: Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850661.pdf
Jurisdiction: Washington (state)
Source verification: official_capture_completeness_unverified
Original Source: https://www.courts.wa.gov/opinions/pdf/850661.pdf ↗

Related Parts of This Source

Full Text

1,800 chars

1 As to claim 3, the verdict form further split this claim into two separate claims, the first of which

related to assigning another individual to the role of Acting Lieutenant and the second of which
related to assigning another individual to the role of Night Bikes Sergeant. The jury found SPD not
liable under the first part of claim 3 but was hung on the second part. On appeal, neither party has
assigned error to the verdict on claim 3 or any trial court ruling regarding claim 3.

8
For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.
No. 85066-1-I

attorney fees to Sgt. Hockett as the prevailing party on his statutory employment

claims. See RCW 49.60.030(2); SMC 4.20.870(B). SPD appeals.

SPD argues the trial court erred in denying its CR 50(b) motion for judgment

as a matter of law and its CR 59(a) motion for reconsideration seeking dismissal

of Sgt. Hockett’s hostile work environment claim because he did not exhaust this

claim as required by SMC § 4.20.860-.870 before pursuing his SMC retaliation

claim against SPD in court. We disagree.

Judgment as a matter of law under CR 50(b) is appropriate when,

construing all facts and reasonable inferences in favor of the nonmoving party,

“there is no substantial evidence or reasonable inferences to sustain a verdict for

the nonmoving party.” Paetsch v. Spokane Dermatology Clinic, P.S., 182 Wn.2d

842, 848, 348 P.3d 389 (2015) (quoting Indus. Indem. Co. of Nw. v. Kallevig, 114

Wn.2d 907, 915-16, 792 P.2d 520 (1990)). We review rulings on motions for

judgment as a matter of law de novo. Id. Conversely, we review rulings on CR 59

motions for an abuse of discretion, which occurs when a trial court’s decision is

manifestly unreasonable or exercised on untenable grounds or for untenable