Sprague v. Spokane Valley Fire Dep't

Decision Date25 January 2018
Docket NumberNo. 93800-8,93800-8
Citation409 P.3d 160,189 Wash.2d 858
Parties Jonathan J. SPRAGUE, a married man, Petitioner, v. SPOKANE VALLEY FIRE DEPARTMENT, a fire district; Mike Thompson and Linda Thompson, husband and wife, and the marital community composed thereof, Respondents.
CourtWashington Supreme Court

Matthew C. Albrecht, David Knox DeWolf, Albrecht Law PLLC, 421 W. Riverside Ave. Ste. 614, Spokane, WA, 99201–0402, George M. Ahrend, Ahrend Law Firm PLLC, 100 E. Broadway Ave., Moses Lake, WA, 98837–1740, for Petitioner.

Jeffrey R. Galloway, Michael J. McMahon, Etter McMahon Lamberson Van Wert & Oresk, 618 W. Riverside Ave. Ste. 210 Spokane, WA, 99201–5048, for Respondent.

Conrad Reynoldson, Washington Civil & Disability Advocate, 3513 Ne. 45th St. Ste. G, Seattle, WA, 98105–5660, Matthew McReynolds, Pacific Justice Institute, Po Box 276600, Sacramento, CA, 95827, for Amicus Curiae on behalf of Pacific Justice Institute.

Jeffrey Lowell Needle, Maynard Building, 119 1st Ave. S. Ste. 200, Seattle, WA, 98104–3450, Michael Craig Subit, Frank Freed Subit & Thomas LLP, 705 2nd Ave. Ste. 1200, Seattle, WA, 98104–1798, for Amicus Curiae on behalf of Washington Employment Lawyers Association.

WIGGINS, J.

¶ 1 The Spokane Valley Fire Department (SVFD or Department) fired Captain Jonathan Sprague for persistently including religious comments in e-mails that he sent through the SVFD computer systems and items he posted on the SVFD electronic bulletin board. Sprague sued the Department for violating his First Amendment free speech rights. See U.S. CONST. amend. I. The trial court and Court of Appeals declined to address the merits of Sprague's claims, instead concluding that his earlier, unsuccessful appeal to the Spokane County Civil Service Commission (Commission) collaterally estopped his lawsuit.

¶ 2 We reverse. Sprague has met his initial burden to show that SVFD's restrictions on his speech violated the First Amendment. On remand, the burden will shift to SVFD to show by a preponderance of the evidence that it would have reached the same decision as to respondent's employment termination even in the absence of the protected conduct. Nor does collateral estoppel bar this lawsuit. Accordingly, we remand the case to the superior court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
I. Factual History

¶ 3 Sprague served as a firefighter, and eventually as a captain, for SVFD. During his employment, Sprague and other SVFD employees formed the Spokane County Christian Firefighter Fellowship (Fellowship). Sprague created a list of work e-mail addresses for 46 firefighters1 that he believed were interested in the Fellowship's activities. Sprague began using SVFD's e-mail system to send e-mails about the Fellowship's activities.

¶ 4 SVFD had a policy governing use of its e-mail system (Policy 171). It stated that the e-mail system was to be used for SVFD business only and "should not be used for personal business." SVFD acknowledged that some personal use of the e-mail system was acceptable, so long as it was "linked" to SVFD business. For example, SVFD would allow an employee to use the e-mail system to arrange for a dog sitter if the employee had to stay late or cover a shift.

¶ 5 In addition to its e-mail system, SVFD maintained an electronic bulletin board as a convenient method to contact all 180 SVFD employees across various firehouses. The record does not contain an official policy governing this bulletin board, but evidence indicated that it was used for a variety of personal business, including selling snow tires, requesting tickets to a concert, or seeking recommendations for a babysitter.

¶ 6 SVFD also provided an employee assistance program (EAP) for the benefit of its employees, administered by SVFD's health insurer. The insurer prepared newsletters for SVFD employees that touched on various mental health issues and topics like parenting. These newsletters were sent to SVFD employees through SVFD's e-mail system. Newsletters discussed suicide, "caregiver depression" and how to "change your mood," eating disorders, compulsive gambling, binge drinking, and team building.

¶ 7 Sprague contends that the topics discussed in the EAP newsletters were open for discussion via SVFD's e-mail system. SVFD disagrees, claiming that it does not "invite comment or discussion from SVFD employees" on the EAP newsletters. However, SVFD acknowledges that an employee could "respond to a particular EAP e-mail and inform SVFD employees of other resources available on the topics discussed within the EAP newsletters, as well as the time, place, and contact information of the organization or event." Sprague argues this was precisely what he was doing in his e-mails and electronic bulletin board posts that discussed the Fellowship.

¶ 8 Sprague posted information about the Fellowship's meetings and newsletters on SVFD's electronic bulletin board. For example, one bulletin board post discussed the topic of suicide and contained two scriptural quotes.

¶ 9 Sprague sent e-mails through SVFD's system about the Fellowship to his self-compiled e-mail list of other firefighters. One e-mail asked recipients to vote on a logo for the Fellowship. Some logos contained the image of a cross and the phrase "soli Deo gloria," which translates to "glory to God alone." Two additional logos contained the image of a flame.

¶ 10 Other e-mails that Sprague sent over SVFD's e-mail system contained a link to the Fellowship's newsletter, as well as brief messages. The record contains five such messages that Sprague sent over SVFD's e-mail system in 2012. In April, he sent a message discussing suicide, the Fellowship's logo, supplements, and social activities. In May, Sprague sent out an e-mail with a quote about Christ, which also discussed leadership, suicide, and social activities.

In July, Sprague sent an e-mail titled "More discussion about leadership and suicide prevention." In August, Sprague sent an e-mail discussing how teachings from the Bible could help individuals and families deal with difficult situations. Finally, in September, Sprague sent an e-mail about how biblical teachings can help alleviate stress and an update on a previous activity.

¶ 11 These e-mails and postings generated controversy among Sprague's supervisors. They took progressive discipline against Sprague in an effort to halt his communications about the Fellowship on SVFD's e-mail and bulletin board systems. A member of the Spokane Valley Board of Fire Commissioners sent a letter to Sprague, requesting that he stop using SVFD's e-mail system and use his personal e-mail address instead:

If you wish to send personal emails while on duty (if otherwise permitted under SVFD policy), you may do so using a personal e-mail account (such as Hotmail, Gmail, Yahoo or Comcast account). Using a personal email account, you may only send messages to other personal email accounts. You may not use a personal email account to send messages or solicitations [to] official SVFD accounts.

Sprague did not use his personal e-mail and continued to send e-mails over SVFD's e-mail system. In turn, his supervisors continued their efforts to halt his communications.

¶ 12 SVFD's letters focused on the religious content of Sprague's postings:

The inappropriate and prohibited behavior involved written content that was of a religious nature, including religious symbols. ... The inappropriate and prohibited behavior involved the use of language and written content that was of a religious nature, specifically the quotation of scripture.

Valerie Biladeau, SVFD's representative in the lawsuit, testified that the problem with Sprague's e-mails was that they were not "content neutral." She stated that although the "subject language" of Sprague's e-mails was the same as the EAP newsletters, they offered tips "from his interpretation of what [Sprague] had read in the Bible." This was an issue because SVFD "want[ed] to keep everything content neutral to separate church from state because [it is] a state organization." She told Sprague that the "content of the who, where, what, why and when is okay, but [to] please remove the scripture."

¶ 13 Despite his supervisors' continued warnings, Sprague continued to post on the bulletin board and send e-mails about the Fellowship over SVFD's e-mail system. Eventually, Sprague was terminated from SVFD on the recommendation of the fire chief and SVFD's Board of Fire Commissioners. His discharge was a direct result of the e-mails and bulletin board postings, as well as his failure to obey his superiors' orders to cease the communications.

II. Procedural History

¶ 14 Sprague appealed his termination to the Spokane County Civil Service Commission. Sprague argued that SVFD violated his right to exercise his religion and his right to free speech. The Commission held a hearing in which Sprague and SVFD were represented by counsel, made opening statements, called witnesses, cross-examined them, and presented documentary evidence. Both parties filed posthearing briefs.

¶ 15 The Commission found that SVFD's policies were equally applied to all employees and prohibited the expression of all religious views. The Commission ruled in favor of SVFD and upheld Sprague's termination. Sprague did not appeal the Commission's adverse decision, which became final.

¶ 16 Sprague then filed this action in Spokane County Superior Court. He sued under 42 U.S.C. section 1983, claiming that SVFD violated his First Amendment rights of free speech and free exercise of religion, as well as his equal protection rights under the Fourteenth Amendment.2 Sprague also claimed that SVFD violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1991.3 He made additional state law claims, arguing that SVFD violated his free speech rights, free exercise of religion rights, and equal protection rights under Washington State Constitution article I, sections 5, 11, and 12. Finally, Sprague argued that SVFD discriminated against him on...

To continue reading

Request your trial
32 cases
  • Reeves v. Mason Cnty.
    • United States
    • Washington Court of Appeals
    • May 17, 2022
    ...to deny operation of the doctrine and public policy as the motivation behind rejecting application. Sprague v. Spokane Valley Fire Department , 189 Wash.2d 858, 903, 409 P.3d 160 (2018). Although public policy hopefully shadows justice, we may qualify or reject collateral estoppel when its ......
  • State v. Witkowski
    • United States
    • Washington Court of Appeals
    • April 24, 2018
    ...context than the United States Constitution unless the parties adequately brief the Gunwall factors. Sprague v. Spokane Valley Fire Dep't et al. , 189 Wash.2d 858, 409 P.3d 160 (2018). Thus, I would decline to consider Berven and Witkowski's argument under article 1, section 7 as it was not......
  • Hendrickson v. Moses Lake Sch. Dist.
    • United States
    • Washington Supreme Court
    • November 1, 2018
    ...a result, we decline to reach the issue of whether the trial court erred by giving Instruction No. 18. Sprague v. Spokane Valley Fire Dep’t, 189 Wash.2d 858, 876, 409 P.3d 160 (2018) ("We will not consider arguments that a party fails to brief.").3 A school district’s duty to anticipate and......
  • Weaver v. City of Everett
    • United States
    • Washington Supreme Court
    • October 17, 2019
    ...the defendant's "incentive to litigate [the traffic infraction] was low." Id. at 312, 27 P.3d 600. In Sprague v. Spokane Valley Fire Dep't , 189 Wash.2d 858, 903, 409 P.3d 160 (2018), we held that collateral estoppel would work an injustice "because of the disparity of relief" between the p......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT