Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 52293-4-II Published Opinion.pdf

Citation: Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 52293-4-II Published Opinion.pdf
Jurisdiction: Washington (state)
Source verification: official_capture_completeness_unverified
Original Source: https://www.courts.wa.gov/opinions/pdf/D2%2052293-4-II%20Published%20Opinion.pdf ↗

Related Parts of This Source

1,748 chars

discharged from employment. The issue is whether Mackey established that she was doing

satisfactory work. Mikkelsen, 189 Wn.2d at 527.

Home Depot presented extensive evidence that Mackey’s work was not satisfactory.

Lupica, the store’s operations manager, conducted an investigation that revealed multiple

violations of Home Depot’s discount policies. Mackey’s termination notice stated that the

estimated total of unauthorized discounts Mackey gave without manager approval was over

$17,000.

In response to Home Depot’s investigation findings, Mackey disputed that she actually

had violated Home Depot’s discount policies. In her declaration, Mackey stated, “At no time did

I ever give any volume discounts that were not authorized or provided from the bid desk after

reviewing my submitted bids.” CP at 100. She also stated, “I did not knowingly violate any of

Home Depot’s polices relating to customer discounts at any time and when there was an issue or

a question, I spoke with individuals in management. . . . I complied with all of Home Depot’s

policies and requirements, as they had been explained to me by Home Depot.” CP at 102.

11
For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.
No. 52293-4-II

Mackey concluded:

29. I did not give any sales on items without approval or instruction from
management.

30. I did not give double discounts to customers.

31. I did a good job and followed policies while working for Home Depot.

32. I did apply customer discounts as instructed by Home Depot policies and
management and supervisors.

CP at 103. In addition, in her deposition Mackey claimed that Lupica had made a mistake in his

investigation and that he had “falsified quite a bit.” CP at 58.