Skip to main content

Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 341038_pub.pdf

Citation
Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 341038_pub.pdf
Jurisdiction
Washington (state)
Source verification
official_capture_completeness_unverified

Related Parts of This Source

Full Text

1,730 chars
So, the question you should be asking yourself now is why did Joel
respond the way that he did?
Evidently, sometime before I brought my plan forward to Jose a
student from the GU [B]ulletin interviewed Jose about why there are no
pads under the basketball hoops in the intramural courts. Coincidentally
one of the examples I used in pitching my plan to Jose as to why we need
increased communication between athletics and RFC staff is that our

20
For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.

No. 34103-8-III
Martin v. Gonzaga University

repeated requests for pads have been denied. (I have mended more than my
share of impact injuries from students hitting the wall during intramural
basketball, and my pitch is that if RFC staff could be heard by more than
one member of the athletic staff, i.e., Joel, then they might be able to get the
safety items that the facility needs).

So who made the decision to terminate and why?
I believe I was terminated by Chris based on Joel's unfounded
allegations. Also, I was terminated the day after a student suffered a serious
head injury by hitting the "pad-less" wall under the basketball hoops on the
intramural courts. Coincidence? I think not.

CP at 103-05 (alterations in original). David Martin ended his letter by proposing that

Gonzaga University adopt his plan, rehire him, and give him a promotion.

Following David Martin's termination in 2012, the Athletics Department requested

a third assessment of the need for protective padding on the basketball court walls. Joel

Madsen, a risk manager at Gonzaga, recommended that protective pads be installed.

Chris Standiford approved the installation of the protection pads and the university