Segaline v. State, Department of Labor and Industries
| Decision Date | 27 August 2013 |
| Docket Number | 42945-4-II |
| Parties | MICHAEL SEGALINE, a single person, Appellant, v. STATE OF WASHINGTON, DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND INDUSTRIES, Respondent |
| Court | Washington Court of Appeals |
UNPUBLISHED OPINION
APPELLANT Michael Segaline, has moved for reconsideration of the unpublished opinion filed in this case. After due consideration, we grant the motion. The court withdraws the May 21, 2013 opinion and replaces it with the attached opinion.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Michael Segaline appeals the summary judgment dismissal of his negligent supervision and malicious prosecution claims against the Department of Labor and Industries (L&I), and of his 42 U.S.C. § .1983 claim against dismissed defendant Alan Croft. Segaline argues (1) genuine issues of material fact remain regarding malicious prosecution and negligent supervision, and (2) his § 1983 claim was timely under a continuing violation theory. We reverse summary dismissal of Segaline's malicious prosecution claim, affirm dismissal of the negligent supervision claim, reverse the trial court's finding that it did not have discretion to consider Segaline's continuing violation theory, and remand for further proceedings.
This case is before us for the second time. In Segaline's first appeal, we affirmed summary judgment dismissal of most of Segaline's claims under the civil immunity granted by RCW 4.24.510.[1] Segaline v. Dep't of Labor & Indus., 144 Wn.App. 312, 326-327, 182 P.3d 480 (2008). We also affirmed summary judgment dismissal of Segaline's § 1983 claim against L&I employee Alan Croft as time-barred. 144 Wn.App. at 332. The Supreme Court reversed as to the claims dismissed under RCW 4.24.510, holding that the statute does not give immunity to government agencies, but it affirmed our dismissal of the § 1983 claim. Segaline v. Dep't of Labor &Indus., 169 Wn.2d 467, 479, 238 P.3d 1107 (2010). On remand, the trial court granted summary judgment to L&I on Segaline's remaining claims and denied Segaline's motion to revive his § 1983 claim. Segaline appeals to us once again.
Segaline is a licensed electrician who routinely seeks permits for electrical work from L&I. Several incidents at L&I's East Wenatchee office in 2003 prompted L&I to serve Segaline with a trespass notice, culminating in his arrest.
The first incident occurred on June 9, when Segaline called L&I's East Wenatchee office about what he characterized as a "bogus" contractor deposit account at the agency. Segaline spoke to L&I service coordinator Jeanne Guthrie. According to Guthrie, Segaline said he would hold L&I employees accountable, that the issue could cost them their jobs, that he would institute legal proceedings, and that he would be bringing a tape recorder to the L&I office. He also alluded to something happening if he "w[ou]nd up dead, " but he did not finish the sentence. Clerk's Papers (CP) at 87-88. Although Segaline did not yell during this conversation, he talked very loudly.
On June 10, electrical program supervisor David Whittle called Segaline to attempt to resolve the problems Segaline was having. Segaline agreed to meet with Whittle on June 19. That same day, Segaline came to the L&I office and told Guthrie that Whittle had better bring all the necessary paperwork to the upcoming meeting or else he should bring his resume and get ready to join the private sector. Although Segaline seemed calmer than on June 9, Guthrie felt that Segaline was trying to intimidate her and was trying to imply some kind of threat. The only specific threat that Guthrie could name, however, was that Segaline stated he would record his dealings with L&I, which Guthrie feared could lead to a confrontation if anyone objected to being recorded. Guthrie also felt intimidated by Segaline just "being [tjhere." CP at 100. However, Segaline did not raise his voice, his face did not get red, and he left of his own accord after about five minutes.
L&I customer service specialist Alice Lou Hawkins was also present at the June 10 encounter. She described Segaline as "quite threatening in his verbal language, very aggressive and threatening and intimidating, red-faced, stating that one of us is going to go to jail, that I'd better get an attorney." CP at 129. She also stated that Segaline was "leaning toward me across the counter very up in my face, very red-faced, yelling, very intimidating, very harassing." CP at 139.
On June 13, there was a longer incident lasting about half an hour. Segaline came to the L&I office and tried to pay for a permit, but it had already been paid for out of his contractor deposit account. Segaline insisted that L&I staff were required by law to accept his money, although L&I staff assured him the money was not owed. According to Guthrie, although Segaline did not scream, he was talking very loudly and the confrontation was very disruptive. Guthrie characterized Segaline's tone of voice as "yelling, " but she acknowledged that he did not use profanity or call her any names. Segaline made no threatening hand gestures, but he gesticulated at a clock to emphasize that L&I was wasting his time.
The planned meeting with Whittle occurred at L&I on June 19. L&I Regional Health and Safety Coordinator Alan Croft was also present. At the meeting, Segaline largely refused to discuss how to resolve his conflicts with L&I. Instead, he repeatedly demanded to know under what authority Croft and Whittle believed they could prevent him from recording the meeting, although it was being recorded at the time. Segaline also repeatedly demanded to know what branch of the government Whittle and Croft worked for, repeatedly stated they were not doing their jobs, repeatedly accused them of breaking unspecified laws, and repeatedly insisted that they contact the Attorney General. Segaline also repeatedly insisted on speaking with Guthrie. Segaline eventually left the meeting to try to speak with Guthrie.
According to Croft, Segaline did not yell at the June 19 meeting, but he was red-faced and tense, seeming as if he was "ready to explode." CP at 57. According to Guthrie, Segaline yelled that he wanted to speak with her after he left the meeting. Croft testified at his deposition that he asked Segaline to leave the office at least twice. Croft called 911 when Segaline did not leave; Segaline left just as the police arrived.
After the June 19 meeting, Croft drafted a trespass notice, informing Segaline that he was trespassed from the East Wenatchee L&I offices. Croft listed "disruptive behavior, harassment of staff and failure to follow instructions for contacting the department" as the basis for the notice. CP at 19. The notice stated that it could be terminated on Whittle's written approval. Shortly thereafter, Croft became aware that trespassing a member of the public from a government office might prove controversial and might not be legal. Croft requested an opinion from the Attorney General's Office on the issue, but he never received any guidance.
The next incident occurred on June 30. Segaline came to the L&I office, and Hawkins attempted to serve the trespass notice on Segaline. Segaline pushed the notice back toward Hawkins and told her that L&I had better get an attorney. According to Hawkins, Segaline yelled during this incident. Police served Segaline with a copy of the notice later that day.
On August 20, Segaline called L&I regarding an emergency permit he needed. The next day, Segaline came into the office. Guthrie objected to Segaline's presence, but Segaline told . her that an electrical inspector at L&I had given him permission to enter the building. Segaline was at the office a short time and then left. Guthrie later sent out an e-mail reminding staff that Segaline was under a trespass notice and should not be allowed on the premises.
On August 22, Segaline again returned to the L&I office. An L&I employee called 911, and the police arrived while Segaline was still in the building. The police had been informed that Segaline was causing a disturbance and refusing to leave. Police officers arrived to find Segaline speaking on the phone with his attorney. The police escorted Segaline outside; Segaline insisted that he had the right to enter the building any time he pleased. Segaline told the police that he would keep returning to the office unless he received a call from the Attorney General. The police arrested Segaline for trespass. Segaline was detained at the local jail before he posted bail. According to Segaline's declaration, he was charged with a crime and the City of East Wenatchee voluntarily dismissed the charges.[2]
Segaline sued L&I on August 8, 2005, alleging (1) negligent infliction of emotional distress, (2) intentional infliction of emotional distress, (3) malicious prosecution, (4) violation of his civil rights, and (5) negligent supervision. Segaline moved to amend his complaint to add Croft as a defendant to a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil rights claim on August 3, 2006. Although the trial court granted the motion to amend, it ruled that the amended complaint would not relate back to the original complaint, finding no excusable neglect in failing to earlier join Croft as a party.
Croft subsequently moved for summary judgment. The trial court granted summary judgment on the grounds that any § 1983 claim against Croft was time-barred under the three-year statute of limitations. The court ruled in the alternative that Croft was entitled to qualified immunity.
L&I moved for summary judgment on Segaline's remaining claims. The trial court granted summary judgment on all claims on the grounds that L&I was immune from suit...
To continue reading
Request your trial