Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 56466-1-II Published Opinion.pdf

DIVISION II
CARL W. PADDOCK, a single person, No. 56466-1-II

Appellant,

v.

THE PORT OF TACOMA, PUBLISHED OPINION

Respondent.

GLASGOW, C.J.—A longshoreman sued an equipment manufacturer after a machine he was

using at work at the Port of Tacoma flipped over, injuring him. Carl W. Paddock, an equipment

maintenance mechanic for the Port, was subpoenaed to testify in a deposition in the

longshoreman’s lawsuit. The accident occurred approximately four years before Paddock’s

deposition testimony. Paddock testified under oath that he had taken the machine out of

commission the day before the accident so the machine’s brakes could be repaired. Port records

ultimately showed Paddock was incorrect.

After learning about Paddock’s testimony, the Port hired an outside investigator to

determine whether Paddock had knowingly provided false information during his deposition. The

investigator concluded that Paddock had lied and that his testimony had caused workplace

disruption. The Port fired Paddock based on the investigator’s report.
For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.

No. 56466-1-II

Paddock then sued the Port. He made claims for wrongful discharge in violation of public

policy and retaliation for multiple grievances he had filed against the Port. Paddock alleged that

he had incurred damages for lost income.

The Port moved for summary judgment. The trial court dismissed Paddock’s claims and

found that Paddock was judicially estopped from receiving lost income after he began receiving

unrelated disability benefits. Paddock appeals, arguing that the trial court erred in granting

summary judgment to the Port.

We reverse the dismissal of Paddock’s wrongful discharge in violation of public policy