Wheeler v. Catholic Archdiocese of Seattle
| Decision Date | 11 May 1992 |
| Docket Number | 27443-1-I and 27559-3-I,Nos. 27282-9-,s. 27282-9- |
| Citation | 829 P.2d 196,65 Wn.App. 552 |
| Court | Washington Court of Appeals |
| Parties | , 3 A.D. Cases 1094, 2 NDLR P 346 Catherina WHEELER, Respondent, v. CATHOLIC ARCHDIOCESE OF SEATTLE, d/b/a Corporation of the Catholic Archbishop of Seattle, Appellant. |
Patrick W. Crowley, Siderius Lonergan & Crowley, Seattle, for appellant.
Judith A. Lonnquist, Shelly Kostrinsky, Seattle, for respondent.
The Catholic Archdiocese of Seattle appeals a judgment on a jury verdict in favor of Catherina Wheeler on her claims of handicap discrimination, retaliation, and negligent supervision. The Archdiocese alleges the trialcourt erred in: (1) directing a verdict for Wheeler on handicap discrimination; (2) ruling that Wheeler's negligent supervision claim was not barred by the exclusive remedy provision of the Industrial Insurance Act; and (3) refusing to offset her recovery by the amount of worker's compensation benefits she received.
Wheeler filed a separate appeal, alleging the trial court erred in: (1) refusing to order reinstatement; and (2) awarding her insufficient attorney's fees.
Catherina Wheeler was hired in 1979 as head housekeeper of St. Thomas Center (Center), a conference facility owned by the Catholic Archdiocese of Seattle (Archdiocese). In 1981 she was promoted to executive housekeeper and received favorable performance evaluations thereafter. The written job description for the position included only supervisory and managerial duties; it did not include physical cleaning tasks.
In April 1984 the Archdiocese hired Norbert Patton as director of maintenance at the Center. Patton combined the housekeeping and maintenance departments under his supervision. As a result, Wheeler's salaried position became an hourly position. She was told not to attend staff meetings and to report to Patton instead of the Center's administrator, Donald Leak. Patton intimated that she would be replaced. Wheeler complained to Leak about problems she was experiencing with Patton, but Leak told her to communicate directly with Patton about the problems.
In May 1984 Wheeler suffered an industrial injury to her hand. She continued to work for 2 weeks while her assistant was on vacation, then went on medical leave for more than 3 months. Before she went on leave, Patton made some sexually explicit comments to her.
During her leave several significant events occurred. First, she received a memorandum from Leak stating that if she and Patton did not make progress on their communication problems within the month, her work performancewould be considered unsatisfactory. Second, Wheeler's office was closed and she was assigned a corner of Patton's office as her work station. Finally, Patton wrote a memorandum to Leak stating that he (Patton) had told Wheeler she could not return to work without a full work release from her doctor.
Wheeler felt that she was "on [her] way out" and was going to lose her job at the Center. She became despondent and attempted suicide. She spent 3 weeks in an inpatient treatment facility.
She returned to work after the 3-month leave before her hand was completely healed. Patton told Wheeler that the worker assigned to clean restrooms and showers was needed in the maintenance department, so Wheeler would have to perform that work. When she complained to Patton after 2 weeks that this heavy work was difficult because of her injury and should be done by a man, Patton responded that she was making more money than most of the men, so she should be able to do a man's work.
Patton began pointing out to Wheeler doors and windows left open and garbage on floors--all in rooms she had previously cleaned and locked. She repeatedly found excrement smeared on the floors and walls of one of the restrooms she was assigned to clean. She believed that Patton was responsible for these occurrences. Patton gave her a dismissal warning for having mentioned to a maintenance worker that the Center's building might be sold in a few years, a fact Wheeler alleges was common knowledge.
In October 1984, the month after she returned to work, Wheeler complained to Leak that Patton was incompetent, and she described her problems with Patton. Leak met with both of them and they agreed to resolve some of their differences. Soon after the meeting, however, Wheeler began to receive threatening telephone calls in the middle of the night. The content of the calls caused her to believe that Patton was making them. She reported the calls to Leak and to the police. Patton continued to make sexually explicit comments to Wheeler at work.
Leak acknowledged that Wheeler complained to him about Patton's use of foul language. He also acknowledged that Wheeler told him about an incident during which Patton made highly inappropriate sexual comments. Wheeler also testified that she told Leak another female employee had been sexually propositioned by Patton.
In November 1984 Patton was fired for neglect of duty and failure to renew his boiler's license. Wheeler testified that Leak asked her to remain at home on the day Patton was fired and told her, "we are doing this for your protection."
The following month, Wheeler reinjured her hand on the same defective mechanism that had caused the original injury. Patton had been assigned to repair the mechanism. Wheeler's arm was placed in a removable cast from January to April 1985. Leak permitted her to continue working in her supervisory capacity.
In January 1985 Patton was reinstated by order of the Archdiocese's personnel board. Upon hearing of the personnel board's decision, Wheeler told Leak she feared Patton because of his actions toward her and because of his description of his violent military and mercenary exploits. She also put in writing the report she had made earlier about Patton propositioning another female employee.
When Patton returned to work he threatened to take revenge on those responsible for his firing. A number of unusual incidents then occurred, including damage to Wheeler's car and several incidents at work which were potentially very dangerous to Wheeler. Wheeler testified concerning circumstances which caused her to believe Patton was responsible for each of these occurrences. Patton was subsequently fired for a second time.
In April 1985 the first of three surgeries was performed on Wheeler's hand. She returned to work 6 weeks later and worked until she underwent the second surgery in September 1985. Wheeler testified that when she left for the second surgery, Leak assured her there would always be a place for her at the Center and that another employee would fill her position only on a temporary basis.
Eight months later, Wheeler's doctor released her to perform her supervisory responsibilities. She met with Leak concerning resuming work but was told the Center had only been obligated to hold her position for 60 days, and that the position had been filled. Wheeler testified that she was interviewed for a file clerk position at half her previous wages, but was rejected as having a poor attitude when she asked for higher pay. Wheeler was not notified of any other job openings nor offered any other jobs with the Archdiocese.
In early 1987 Wheeler successfully completed a vocational rehabilitation course for work as a hotel desk clerk. However, due to further deterioration of her hand condition, she was unable to pursue that career.
Two lay witnesses testified to the emotional trauma Wheeler suffered as a result of Patton's harassment and the loss of her job. Wheeler's treating psychologist testified that she suffers from post-traumatic stress disorder.
Leak testified that there had been no performance-related reason for placing Wheeler under Patton's supervision. He also testified that Patton had correctly instructed Wheeler in 1984 that she was not to return to work without a full medical release. He admitted that after Wheeler left the Center in September 1985, three job vacancies occurred, and that Wheeler was not notified of any of them. Wheeler presented evidence that she was qualified for each of those positions.
At the close of the evidence, the court granted Wheeler's motion for a directed verdict on handicap discrimination and denied the Archdiocese's motion to dismiss the negligent supervision claim. The court reiterated its pretrial ruling that the Archdiocese would not be entitled to an offset of Wheeler's worker's compensation benefits in the event she was awarded damages.
The jury was instructed on sex, age 1 and handicap discrimination, retaliation for opposing discrimination, negligentsupervision/negligent infliction of emotional distress, and outrage. The jury returned a general verdict of $150,000 in favor of Wheeler on the claims of handicap discrimination, retaliation, and negligent supervision/negligent infliction of emotional distress.
The trial court denied the Archdiocese's motion for a new trial and Wheeler's motion for reinstatement. The court entered judgment on the verdict and awarded Wheeler approximately $47,000 in attorney's fees and expenses. The Archdiocese appeals the judgment, Wheeler appeals the denial of reinstatement, and both parties appeal the attorney's fee award. Their appeals have been consolidated.
A motion for a directed verdict may be granted only if it can be said, as a matter of law, that no evidence or reasonable inferences existed to sustain a verdict for the party opposing the motion. The evidence must be considered in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party.
Bender v. Seattle, 99 Wash.2d 582, 587, 664 P.2d 492 (1983). The motion should be denied if the nonmoving party presents substantial evidence to support a verdict, i.e., evidence that would convince an unprejudiced, thinking mind of the truth of the facts to which the evidence is directed. Hojem v. Kelly, 93 Wash.2d 143, 145, 606 P.2d...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Goodman v. Boeing Co.
...basic coverage of the act. The claim was thus unaffected by the IIA's exclusive remedy provision. Wheeler v. Catholic Archdiocese of Seattle, 65 Wash.App. 552, 568, 829 P.2d 196, review granted in part, denied in part, 120 Wash.2d 1011, 844 P.2d 436 (1992). Furthermore, Goodman did not argu......
-
Snyder v. Medical Service Corp.
...627, 639, 708 P.2d 393 (1985). See also Staub v. Boeing Co., 919 F.Supp. 366, 370 (W.D.Wash.1996) (citing Wheeler v. Catholic Archdiocese, 65 Wash.App. 552, 560-61, 829 P.2d 196 (1992), rev'd on other grounds, 124 Wash.2d 634, 880 P.2d 29 (1994)); Curtis v. Sec. Bank, 69 Wash.App. 12, 17, 8......
-
Lords v. Northern Automotive Corp.
...for negligent infliction of emotional distress arising during employment are recognized in Washington. He cites Wheeler v. Catholic Archdiocese, 65 Wash.App. 552, 829 P.2d 196, review granted in part, denied in part, 120 Wash.2d 1011, 844 P.2d 436 (1992); Huber v. Standard Ins. Co., 841 F.2......
-
Francom v. Costco Wholesale Corp.
...overruled on other grounds by Phillips v. City of Seattle, 111 Wash.2d 903, 766 P.2d 1099 (1989)]; Wheeler v. Catholic Archdiocese of Seattle, 65 Wash.App. 552, 829 P.2d 196 (1992), rev'd in part on other grounds, 124 Wash.2d 634, 880 P.2d 29 Herried, 90 Wash.App. at 476, 957 P.2d 767. Cost......