PORT ANGELES — Clallam County Superior Court Judge Erik Rohrer has let stand a $1.6 million judgment for former Port Angeles Finance Director Yvonne Ziomkowski against the city.
Rohrer refused last week to lower the $1.5 million portion of the judgment for non-economic damages or grant a new civil trial in the gender discrimination case.
Rohrer also awarded her lawyer, Karen Unger, $160,680 in attorney fees and costs.
But Rohrer on Friday denied Unger’s motion to impose sanctions on Seattle lawyer Shannon Ragonesi, who represented the city, for arguments she made in seeking a new trial or lower award.
Ragonesi, armed with a rare written declaration from a dissenting juror, had asserted the jury improperly reached its April 8 verdict and that two jurors failed to reveal an alleged familial relationship.
Juror Richard Deane, revealing what he said jurors discussed in the jury room, said the verdict for non-economic damages was based on what Ziomkowski, 62, would have earned had she not had an eye condition.
The condition, blepharospasm, was aggravated by stress from being fired in March 2012 for violating the city’s general-leave cashout policy, according to testimony at the trial.
Ragonesi claimed the verdict was based on ‘speculative evidence’ unsupported by expert-witness testimony during the three-week trial.
Unger argued that Ragonesi did not have any legal authority to support what she called Ragonesi’s “allegation of juror misconduct.”
“It’s irresponsible for the city to raise this,” Unger argued Friday.
But Rohrer said sanctions should be imposed only when it is “patently clear” that a claim for a new trial has no chance of success.
Ragonesi posing her argument “just means we have a disagreement about a particular piece of evidence,” Rohrer said Friday.
Sanctions “may include an order to pay to the other party or parties the amount of the reasonable expenses incurred because of the filing of the pleading, motion, or legal memorandum, including a reasonable attorney fee,” according to state Court Rules.
Considering appeal
Ragonesi, employed by the Washington Cities Insurance Authority (WCIA) on behalf of the city, said after the hearing Friday that an appeal of the verdict to the state Court of Appeals is “under consideration.”
An appeal must be filed within 30 calendar days of the filing of the judgment, which is scheduled to occur this Friday.
Ragonesi’s attorney fees and costs, and the award for Ziomkowski, are covered under the city’s insurance policy with the WCIA.
Rohrer issued his rulings Wednesday on Ragonesi’s request for a new trial or lower judgment amount and on Unger’s motion for attorney fees and costs.
“While it is true that plaintiff did not prevail on every issue before the court from the beginning of this litigation, she is still the prevailing party,” Rohrer said.
“Had she not prevailed on some issues at summary judgment, she would obviously not be the prevailing party.”
He awarded Unger attorney fees of $300 an hour for 507.75 hours, or $152,325 in attorney fees, and $8,355 for attorney costs, much of it for court reporting services.
Rohrer also ruled that case law gives jurors wide latitude to reach verdicts.
He said it is inadmissible to question a verdict based on jurors’ mental processes, motives, intentions, beliefs, or the effect or weight they may give certain evidence.
The jury had decided that Ziomkowski’s gender was a motivating factor in then-City Manager Kent Myers firing her, that she was subjected to sexual harassment while employed by the city and that the damages caused by the city’s unlawful conduct totaled $1.5 million in non-economic damages and $113,471 in lost earnings, or economic damages.
Siblings question
Rohrer said there was no evidence of Deane’s assertion that two of the jurors were brother and sister — not that it would have mattered.
“The allegation about two of the jurors being siblings does not directly relate to the jury’s process in arriving at its verdict,” Rohrer said.
There also was no evidence on which jurors were related or that the relationship influenced the verdict.
“There is no allegation of withholding information or other actual misconduct,” Rohrer said.
Finally, it would have been the attorneys’ responsibility to inquire on familial relationships during jury selection if the issue were important, Rohrer said.
Ragonesi also had claimed that the non-economic damages related to Ziomkowski’s diminished work capacity due to her eye condition were so high that they were “the direct result of passion, prejudice and pure speculation on the part of the jury.”
Rohrer said her argument relates to the ratio of economic to non-economic damages but noted case law supporting her argument “did not state any clear rule establishing that a certain ratio is evidence of an excessive award.”
In addition, there is no requirement that the award be supported by overwhelming evidence, he said.
“There is, however, reasonable evidence or inferences to support the award,” Rohrer ruled.
Dr. Eugene May, a Seattle neuro-opthamologist, testified that Ziomkowski’s blepharospasm — involuntary closing of the eyelids, according to www.blepharospasm.org — has no known cause but is exacerbated by stress, Rohrer said.
Fired March 15, 2012, Ziomkowski began experiencing symptoms from the neurological condition in fall 2012 and testified at the trial that she is unable to drive.
“It is functional blindness,” Rohrer said, paraphrasing May’s testimony.
“It is obvious such a condition could impact employability.”
Ziomkowski had testified during the trial that she had intended to do consulting after retiring from the city.
________
Senior Staff Writer Paul Gottlieb can be reached at 360-452-2345, ext. 55650, or at pgottlieb@peninsuladailynews.com.
