Michael McGowan, et ux v. City of Asotin

CourtCourt of Appeals of Washington
DecidedMay 10, 2016
Docket33428-7
StatusUnpublished

This text of Michael McGowan, et ux v. City of Asotin (Michael McGowan, et ux v. City of Asotin) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Washington primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Michael McGowan, et ux v. City of Asotin, (Wash. Ct. App. 2016).

Opinion

FILED May 10, 2016 In the Office of the Clerk of Court WA State Court of Appeals, Division Ill

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON DIVISION THREE

MICHAEL JOHN McGOWAN, JR., and ) No. 33428-7-111 BETH ANN McGOWAN, husband and ) wife, ) ) Appellants, ) ) v. ) UNPUBLISHED OPINION ) CITY OF ASOTIN and DOES I through ) x, ) ) Respondents. )

LAWRENCE-BERREY, J. - Michael John McGowan, Jr., brought suit against his

former employer, the city of Asotin (City), for violation of his civil service rights under

chapter 41.12 RCW, breach of contract, and wrongful discharge. The trial court

dismissed Mr. McGowan's claims on summary judgment. Mr. McGowan contends that

the trial court improperly dismissed his claim under chapter 41.12 RCW, and his claims

for breach of contract and wrongful discharge-both which derive from his statutory

claim. We disagree and affirm the trial court. No. 33428-7-111 McGowan v. City ofAsotin

FACTS

In August 2008, the City hired Michael McGowan as a police officer. Mr.

McGowan became the third full-time employee of the City's police department; the other

two employees were Chief of Police Lee Reed and William Derbonne. At the time of Mr.

McGowan's hire, and for all times relevant thereafter, the City's personnel manual

provided in relevant part:

Unless specific rights are granted to them in employment contracts or civil service rules, or collective bargaining agreements, all employees of the City are considered at-will employees and may be terminated from City employment at any time, with or without cause and with or without notice.

Clerk's Papers (CP) at 31.

As a consequence of employing three full-time police officers, the City established

a city police civil service commission via an ordinance passed on October 27, 2008. In

May 2009, Chief Reed resigned, and the City's full-time police force was reduced to two

employees-Mr. McGowan and Mr. Derbonne. In September 2009, the City repealed its

city police civil service commission via another ordinance that "cancelled and abolished"

the city police civil service commission. CP at 54.

In July 2010, the City issued Mr. McGowan a written disciplinary warning for

insubordination based on his unwillingness to conduct a driving under the influence

(DUI) arrest. The next month, the City issued Mr. McGowan a final written

2 No. 33428-7-111 McGowan v. City ofAsotin

insubordination warning, identifying both his failure to perform as expected on DUI

emphasis patrols and his absence from scheduled training.

On October 19, 2010, the City terminated Mr. McGowan "effective immediately."

CP at 59. The written termination form identified that Mr. McGowan had missed another

training session, and "lack[s] the necessary skills to meet [the City's] expectations."

CP at 59. Mr. McGowan responded by sending the City a letter that stated "the City of

Asotin was negligent in not moving forward with the establishment of a Civil Service

Commission once [it] hired three full time officers in 2008." CP at 60. According to Mr.

McGowan, the City did not offer him a pretermination hearing.

In June 2013, Mr. McGowan sued the City for violations of chapter 41.12 RCW,

breach of contract, and wrongful discharge. Mr. McGowan alleged that the City "denied

[him] due process by not establishing a civil service commission to review the alleged

incidents which ultimately led to his termination." CP at 5. In December 2014, the City

moved for summary judgment. The City argued that it complied with chapter 41.12 RCW

as it assembled a city police civil service commission after Mr. McGowan was hired, and

then lawfully dismantled it when the full-time members of the city police department

dropped below three. After the trial court requested and considered supplemental

3 No. 33428-7-III McGowan v. City ofAsotin

briefing, it granted the City's motion dismissing Mr. McGowan's claims. Mr. McGowan

timely appeals.

ANALYSIS

This court reviews an order granting summary judgment de novo, and engages in

the same inquiry as the trial court. Seattle Police Officers Guild v. City of Seattle, 151

Wn.2d 823, 830, 92 P.3d 243 (2004). This court "consider[s] the facts and all reasonable

inferences from the facts in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party." Lane v.

Harborview Med. Ctr., 154 Wn. App. 279, 288, 227 P.3d 297 (2010). "The object and

function of summary judgment procedure is to avoid a useless trial." Barber v. Bankers

Life & Cas. Co., 81 Wn.2d 140, 144, 500 P.2d 88 (1972).

Summary judgment is appropriate if no genuine issue of material fact exists, and

the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. CR 56( c). "A material fact

exists when the outcome of the litigation depends on its resolution." Seattle Police

Officers Guild, 151 Wn.2d at 830. The initial burden is on the moving party to show

there is no genuine issue of material fact. Young v. Key Pharm., Inc., 112 Wn.2d 216,

225, 770 P.2d 182 (1989). "The burden then shifts to the nonmoving party to set forth

specific facts demonstrating a genuine issue for trial." Am. Exp. Centurion Bank v.

Stratman, 172 Wn. App. 667, 673, 292 P.3d 128 (2012). "Mere allegations or conclusory

4 No. 33428-7-111 McGowan v. City ofAsotin

statements of facts unsupported by evidence are not sufficient to establish a genuine

issue." Rucker v. NovaStar Mortg., Inc., 177 Wn. App. 1, 10, 311 P.3d 31 (2013).

A. Mr. McGowan's Civil Service Due Process Claim Under Chapter 41.12 RCW

Chapter 41.12 RCW sets forth civil service rules for the police officers of cities

and towns. Tenured, full-time city police officers covered by chapter 41.12 RCW have a

property interest in continued employment. Bullo v. City of Fife, 50 Wn. App. 602, 607,

749 P.2d 749 (1988); see RCW 41.12.090. The due process clause of the United States

Constitution safeguards a person's property interest by requiring notice and an

opportunity to be heard prior to any governmental deprivation of a property interest.

Therefore, a police officer covered by chapter 41.12 RCW is entitled to a pretermination

Loudermill 1 hearing. See Nickerson v. City ofAnacortes, 45 Wn. App. 432, 437-38, 725

P.2d 1027 (1986); accord Bullo, 50 Wn. App. at 606-07.

Both parties cite and rely on RCW 41.12.010 and RCW 41.12.020 in their

arguments for and against application of chapter 41.12 RCW to Mr. McGowan's

termination.

I Cleveland Bd. ofEduc. v. Loudermill, 470 U.S. 532, 105 S. Ct. 1487, 84 L. Ed.

5 No.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cleveland Board of Education v. Loudermill
470 U.S. 532 (Supreme Court, 1985)
Young v. Key Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
770 P.2d 182 (Washington Supreme Court, 1989)
Streater v. White
613 P.2d 187 (Court of Appeals of Washington, 1980)
Bullo v. City of Fife
749 P.2d 749 (Court of Appeals of Washington, 1988)
State v. Young
888 P.2d 142 (Washington Supreme Court, 1995)
State v. King
202 P.3d 351 (Court of Appeals of Washington, 2009)
Lane v. HARBORVIEW MEDICAL CENTER
227 P.3d 297 (Court of Appeals of Washington, 2010)
Carrillo v. City of Ocean Shores
94 P.3d 961 (Court of Appeals of Washington, 2004)
State v. Swecker
115 P.3d 297 (Washington Supreme Court, 2005)
State v. Cooper
128 P.3d 1234 (Washington Supreme Court, 2006)
Nickerson v. City of Anacortes
725 P.2d 1027 (Court of Appeals of Washington, 1986)
Barber v. Bankers Life & Casualty Co.
500 P.2d 88 (Washington Supreme Court, 1972)
State v. Thorne
921 P.2d 514 (Washington Supreme Court, 1996)
Seattle Police Officers Guild v. City of Seattle
92 P.3d 243 (Washington Supreme Court, 2004)
State v. Swecker
154 Wash. 2d 660 (Washington Supreme Court, 2005)
Tiffany Family Trust Corp. v. City of Kent
119 P.3d 325 (Washington Supreme Court, 2005)
State v. Cooper
156 Wash. 2d 475 (Washington Supreme Court, 2006)
Carrillo v. City of Ocean Shores
122 Wash. App. 592 (Court of Appeals of Washington, 2004)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Michael McGowan, et ux v. City of Asotin, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/michael-mcgowan-et-ux-v-city-of-asotin-washctapp-2016.