Sheats v. City of E. Wenatchee
| Citation | 431 P.3d 489 |
| Decision Date | 11 December 2018 |
| Docket Number | No. 35555-1-III,35555-1-III |
| Parties | Tye SHEATS, Appellant, v. CITY OF EAST WENATCHEE, Douglas County, City of Wenatchee, Chelan County, The Wenatchee World Newspaper, Respondents. |
| Court | Court of Appeals of Washington |
Kenneth H. Kato, Attorney at Law, 1020 N Washington St., Spokane, WA, 99201-2237, for Appellant.
Peter Devin Poulson, City of East Wenatchee, 271 9th St. Ne, East Wenatchee, WA, 98802-4438, Steven Michael Clem, Douglas County Prosecuting Attorney, Po Box 360, 213 Rainer, Waterville, WA, 98858-0360, Danielle R. Marchant, Michael Glenn Bradford, Davis, Arneil Law Firm, LLP, 617 Washington St., Wenatchee, WA, 98801-2600, Douglas J. Shae, Attorney at Law, Po Box 2596, Wenatchee, WA, 98807-2596, Erin McCool, Ogden Murphy Wallace, PLLC, 1 5th St. Ste. 200, Wenatchee, WA, 98801-6650, for Respondents.
PUBLISHED OPINION
Lawrence-Berrey, C.J.¶ 1 RCW 4.28.020 prescribes a procedure before superior courts are deemed to have acquired subject matter jurisdiction over a civil action. The procedure requires service of a summons or filing of a complaint. We hold that the initial pleading filed by Officer Tye Sheats substantially complied with the statutory requirement of filing a complaint so that the trial court obtained subject matter jurisdiction over this action.
¶ 2 RCW 42.56.250(2) exempts certain employment information from dissemination in response to a request for public records under the Public Records Act (PRA), chapter 42.56 RCW. We hold that polygraph reports taken by peace officers as part of a pre-employment screening qualify as "other related materials submitted with respect to an applicant," so that such reports are exempt under RCW 42.56.250(2).
¶ 3 But when an agency elects to disseminate exempt records in response to a PRA request, a person seeking to enjoin dissemination has a heavy burden, which includes establishing that dissemination of the record would clearly not be in the public interest. RCW 43.101.095(2)(a), which requires rigorous screening of peace officers to determine their suitability for employment, evinces clear public policy that peace officers be law abiding persons. Here, Officer Sheats’s redacted polygraph report discloses numerous instances of theft and dishonesty. Because the public has an interest in knowing whether a particular officer is law abiding, the public has an interest in viewing Officer Sheats’s redacted report.
¶ 4 We affirm the trial court’s decision generally denying Officer Sheats’s motion for a permanent injunction.
FACTS
¶ 5 Officer Sheats works as a police officer for the East Wenatchee police department in Douglas County. In 2016, he applied for an opening at the Wenatchee police department in Chelan County. As part of the application process, he submitted to a polygraph test. During the test, Officer Sheats admitted to numerous wrongdoings between 2000 and 2016, including several incidents of theft and dishonesty.
¶ 6 On June 2, 2017, and pursuant to the requirement of Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 83 S.Ct. 1194, 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963), Wenatchee Assistant City Attorney Danielle Marchant wrote a letter to defense counsel in a case where Officer Sheats was identified as a prosecution witness. The letter disclosed Officer Sheats’s admitted wrongdoings as potential impeachment material. Soon after, Ms. Marchant notified the Douglas County prosecuting attorney’s office of the potential impeachment material and attached a copy of the letter she had written to defense counsel. Douglas County Prosecuting Attorney Steven Clem requested from Ms. Marchant a copy of Officer Sheats’s polygraph report. Citing PRA exemptions, Ms. Marchant declined to produce the report.
¶ 7 Officer Sheats was a named prosecution witness in a Douglas County criminal case. Mr. Clem filed a motion in that case to obtain a copy of the polygraph report from the city of Wenatchee. In a letter to Ms. Marchant, Mr. Clem explained he needed the report to comply with his obligation under Brady to disclose potential impeachment material to defense counsel. The State provided the city of Wenatchee and Officer Sheats notice of its motion. The city of Wenatchee did not oppose the motion. Officer Sheats did not file any response. The Douglas County Superior Court issued an order directing the city of Wenatchee to provide a copy of Officer Sheats’s polygraph report.
¶ 8 Ms. Marchant complied with the order and provided the Douglas County prosecutor’s office with a copy of the polygraph report. That same day, Mr. Clem provided a redacted copy of the report to the East Wenatchee police department and to the East Wenatchee city attorney. Soon after, the Douglas County prosecuting attorney’s office provided the same redacted report to all criminal defense attorneys who had a pending case with Officer Sheats identified as a prosecution witness.
¶ 9 On July 17, 2017, a reporter for the Wenatchee World made a PRA request to the city of East Wenatchee seeking " ‘[a]ll disciplinary records, citizen complaints and ethics complaints pertaining to East Wenatchee Officer Tye Sheats.’ " Clerk’s Papers (CP) at 4. The city informed Officer Sheats that it would release the redacted report unless it received an injunction before July 27, 2017.1
PROCEDURE BELOW
¶ 10 On July 26, 2017, Officer Sheats, through counsel, filed an action in Douglas County Superior Court to enjoin the respondent cities and counties from releasing, and the respondent newspaper from obtaining, his polygraph report. Officer Sheats did not file a summons and complaint. Instead, he filed a six-page pleading comprised of three parts. The first part was an ex parte motion requesting a temporary restraining order (TRO) and an eventual permanent injunction. The second part was a declaration of facts setting forth much of the information contained above. The third part was a memorandum of authorities citing and quoting several relevant statutes in support of his ultimate request for a permanent injunction.
¶ 11 That afternoon, Officer Sheats presented his ex parte motion to the court and the court issued a TRO. The order enjoined the respondent cities and counties from disclosing the polygraph report and enjoined the Wenatchee World from obtaining the report. The court set a hearing for 8:00 a.m. on August 14, 2017, for argument related to the request for the permanent injunction.
¶ 12 On July 28, a process server served the initial pleading and order on Mr. Clem. Mr. Clem was not authorized to accept service on behalf of Douglas County. There is no evidence that Officer Sheats served anyone other than Mr. Clem with the initial pleadings or order.
¶ 13 Also on July 28, Douglas County filed a motion to dissolve the TRO and noted its motion for August 1. There were multiple bases for the motion, including improper service of the initial pleadings and order. Douglas County did not allege lack of subject matter or personal jurisdiction.
¶ 14 At the August 1 hearing, Mr. Clem’s substantive objection with the TRO was its overbreadth: it prevented Douglas County from complying with its obligation to disclose Brady material to defense counsel in cases where Officer Sheats was listed as a prosecution witness. In response to the trial court’s comments, the parties expressed optimism that they could agree to a narrower TRO. On August 2, Mr. Clem obtained signatures from all parties on an amended TRO, and the court signed the amended TRO. The amended TRO permitted the respondent cities and counties to disclose Brady material to defense counsel in cases where Officer Sheats was listed as a prosecution witness.
¶ 15 All parties except Chelan County filed briefs prior to the August 14 hearing. Although all parties provided substantive arguments in their briefs, only the city of East Wenatchee and the city of Wenatchee included procedural arguments in their briefs. Those briefs were filed two business days before the August 14 hearing.
¶ 16 Both cities argued that Officer Sheats had not properly commenced the action. The city of East Wenatchee cited CR 3 and argued that Officer Sheats’s failure to file a complaint or serve a summons meant he had "not actually commenced a lawsuit, [and the] Court [should] dismiss his motion." Clerks Papers (CP) at 127. Other than citing CR 3, the city of East Wenatchee did not provide any additional authority or argument for its position. Specifically, it did not mention or discuss lack of subject matter or lack of personal jurisdiction.
¶ 17 The city of Wenatchee cited RCW 4.28.020 and argued that because Officer Sheats had "failed to file a summons and complaint, [the] Court ha[d] not yet acquired jurisdiction over this matter or the parties." CP at 92. Other than citing to the statute, the city of Wenatchee did not provide any additional authority or argument for its position.
¶ 18 Officer Sheats did not respond to the late procedural arguments. Nor did the parties discuss personal jurisdiction at the August 14 hearing.
¶ 19 In a written decision, the trial court determined that Brady required the disclosure of the redacted polygraph report to defense attorneys who had cases where Officer Sheats was listed as a prosecution witness. The court also determined that because the redacted report was required to be disclosed under Brady , it could be disseminated to persons making a PRA request.
¶ 20 Officer Sheats appealed, assigning error to the court’s findings that the redacted report be disclosed under Brady and that it be disclosed under the PRA.
ANALYSIS2
¶ 21 The city of Wenatchee argues that Officer Sheats did not properly commence the matter in accordance with RCW 4.28.020. It argues that this failure prevented the trial court from acquiring subject matter jurisdiction.
¶ 22 Unfortunately, the city offers no additional authority or argument on this claim. An appellate court may decline to address an issue that is insufficiently briefed or argued. RAP...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
§16.3 Procedural Aspects of Requestor-Initiated Actions
...to invoke the court's jurisdiction. See Spokane Research IV, 155 Wn.2d at 105. But see Sheats v. City of E. Wenatchee, 6 Wn.App. 2d 523, 431 P.3d 489 (2018) (requestor's filing of an initial pleading including an ex parte motion, declaration, and memorandum of authorities was sufficient to ......
-
Table of Cases
...Wn. App. 847, 86 P.3d 823 (2004) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31.05[2][d] Sheats v. City of E. Wenatchee, 6 Wn. App. 2d 523, 431 P.3d 489 (2018) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14.02[1] Sheffer, In re Marriage of, 60 Wn. App. 51, 802 P.2d 817 (1990) 27.05 Sheffield, In re, 349 B.......
-
Table of Cases
...of Wash., 193 Wn.2d 860, 447 P.3d 534 (2019): 4.2(2), 4.2(3), 7.2(2), 10.2(3)(c)(i) Sheats v. City of East Wenatchee, 6 Wn.App. 2d 523, 431 P.3d 489 (2018), review denied, 193 Wn.2d 1004 (2019): 6.7(1)(b), 10.2(5), 16.3(1), 16.4 Slaughter v. Snohomish Cnty. Fire Prot. Dist. No. 20, 50 Wn.Ap......
-
§14.02 Jurisdiction
...at law for which jurisdiction has not been vested by law in some other court. Sheats v. City of E. Wenatchee, 6 Wn. App. 2d 523, 534, 431 P.3d 489 (2018) (citing WASH. CONST. art. IV, § 6). In addition, Washington state's constitution specifically grants its courts subject matter jurisdicti......