Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 723421.pdf

Citation: Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 723421.pdf
Jurisdiction: Washington (state)
Source verification: official_capture_completeness_unverified
Original Source: https://www.courts.wa.gov/opinions/pdf/723421.pdf ↗

Related Parts of This Source

Full Text

1,557 chars

8Corbis had previously moved for partial summary judgment on its after-acquired
evidence defense, arguing thatthe defense had been established, as a matter of law, because
there had been a finding that Lodis breached his fiduciary duty, and there was undisputed
evidence that this breach was a terminable offense. The court acknowledged the validity of
Corbis's position, yet found that there remained questions offact for a jury, explaining that "[t]he
question at this stage is not whether Corbis can establish the elements ofthe after-acquired
evidence defense at trial, but whether the evidence is so strong that no reasonable jurorcould
find otherwise."
9After thejury rendered its verdict, Lodis filed a renewed CR 50 motion on Corbis's after-
acquired evidence defense on identical grounds, which Judge Heller similarly denied.

-11 -
             
No. 72342-1-1/12

a new trial under CR 59. The trial court denied Lodis's motion and entered

judgment for Corbis. Lodis now appeals for the second time.

II

Lodis first contends that the trial court erred by "precluding" him from

presenting evidence of his "reasonable belief of age discrimination and by

admitting evidence of the age discrimination verdict in Corbis's favor. This is so,

he asserts, because the evidence of his reasonable belief was relevant but

evidence of the verdict against him was both irrelevant and unfairly prejudicial.

We disagree.

The evidentiary principles of relevancy and prejudice are familiar ones.