Facts: Respondent Roger Skinner was dismissed from his position as a police officer with the Medina Police Department after allegedly making derogatory comments regarding the city’s chief of police. Skinner’s dismissal was subsequently affirmed twice by the city’s Civil Service Commission after Skinner filed an appeal and a motion to reconsider. Following the commission’s denial of Skinner’s motion to reconsider, Skinner filed suit against the commission in the Superior Court for King County, claiming that he had been wrongfully discharged, and attempted to serve process upon the commission at Medina City Hall, which was listed as the commission’s official address despite the fact that it has no office space in the building and commission personnel are not regularly present in it. The civil service commission subsequently filed a motion for summary judgment that was granted by the court, which ruled that Skinner’s action was untimely and that he had not properly served process upon the commission. Skinner appealed the court’s granting of summary judgment to the Washington Court of Appeals, which reversed. The civil service commission appealed this decision to the Supreme Court of Washington.

Question(s): Was Skinner’s wrongful termination action timely under Washington Revised Code §41.12.090 (which requires that such actions be filed within 30 days of a commission’s final judgment)?

If so, did Skinner adequately serve process?

Conclusion: Justice Owens’ opinion for a unanimous Court held that although Skinner had commenced his action against the civil service commission less than 30 days after the commission had rejected his motion to reconsider but more than 30 days after its initial decision, his action was timely as the 30 day period runs from the denial of a motion to reconsider rather than from an initial decision. The Court also ruled that Skinner had substantially complied with §41.12.090’s service of process requirements despite the fact that commission staff did not receive service within 30 days of the commission’s rejection of Skinner’s motion to reconsider due to ambiguity regarding the commission’s physical address as Skinner’s attempt to serve notice of his action was reasonably calculated to provide notice to the commission. Thus, the Court affirmed the Washington Court of Appeals’ reversal of summary judgment and remanded the case for trial.

Docket No. 82306-5 (from Court of Appeals Division I Case No. 60868-1)

Petitioner: Civil Service Commission of the City of Medina

(Counsel: Greg Alan Rubstello and P. Stephen Dijulio)

Respondent: Roger Skinner

(Counsel: William Jacob Murphy)

Briefs:

Argument: Tuesday, January 19, 2010 2:30pm

[Source: TVW, http://tvw.org]

Decided: Thursday, May 13th, 2010

Prevailing Party: Roger Skinner (Respondent)

Vote: 9-0

Citation: Pending

Court: Madsen1 Court (2010-)

Madsen

Johnson

Alexander

Sanders

Chambers

Owens
(Majority)

Fairhurst

Johnson

Stephens