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
Original Source: https://www.courts.wa.gov/opinions/pdf/341038_pub.pdf ↗

Related Parts of This Source

Full Text

1,732 chars

justification prompted its decision to fire, primarily on the "after-acquired evidence"

doctrine. This doctrine precludes or limits an employee from receiving remedies for

wrongful discharge if the employer later discovers evidence of wrongdoing that would

have led to the employee's termination had the employer known of the misconduct. Lodis

v. Corbis Holdings, Inc., 192 Wn. App. 30, 60, 366 P.3d 1246 (2015), review denied, 185

Wn.2d 1038, 377 P.3d 744 (2016); Janson v. North Valley Hospital, 93 Wn. App. 892,

900,971 P.2d 67 (1999). If the employer may limit its liability with evidence of

insubordination discovered after the termination from employment, the employer should

be able to limit its liability with evidence known at the time of the discharge, even if the

39
For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.

No. 34103-8-111
Martin v. Gonzaga University

employer only utilized public policy defying grounds. We discern no reason to

distinguish the two factual scenarios for purposes of employer liability. Under each

circumstance, the employee's misconduct retrospectively substantiated the termination.

Absolving the employer from showing the alternative justification to be a

motivating factor may conflict with the causation element. Under our holding, the

employer still prevails even if the public policy was a substantial factor in the firing, and

the third element only requires proof that the employee's furtherance of public policy

constituted a substantial factor in the discharge. The overriding justification element

assumes.that an unlawful reason for the firing was a substantial factor, but another

predominant reason also justified the termination.