Contact:
E-mail
Olympia
PO Box 40126
Olympia, WA 98504-0126
Seattle
800 Fifth Avenue, Suite 2000
Seattle, WA 98104
The Torts Division is comprised of 45 attorneys and 82 professional staff in Olympia, Tacoma and Seattle. The division defends tort claims and lawsuits against all state agencies, officers and employees. The majority of cases are based on actions brought under theories of liability for state actions such as highway design, release of inmates, injuries on state property, medical malpractice, employment, child care and custody, auto accidents, maritime injuries, false arrests, and unreasonable force. Tort attorneys also provide legal and risk management advice to the Office of Financial Management and state agencies on tort matters.
Back to top
The primary legal service provided by the Torts Division is the resolution of damage claims against state agencies and employees. Many cases are resolved through successful pretrial motions, saving the state significant resources in research, discovery and investigations. The remaining cases are evaluated for settlement after pre-trial discovery. If possible, cases are settled through direct negotiation, or mediated negotiation. Cases that cannot be settled, or those which are inappropriate for settlement due to lack of liability, are tried before juries. The Torts Division also handles all appeals resulting from those cases.
Back to top
The Torts Division attorneys handle an average caseload of 572 lawsuits per year, and its investigators handle approximately 500 pre-lawsuit claims for damages each year.
The division resolved 62 percent of the cases with no payout in state funds in fiscal year (FY) 2006. During the same period, 20 percent of the remaining suits were resolved for less than $50,000. The Torts Division prevails at trial in roughly three out of every four cases tried. Payouts on trial verdicts, as well as overall payouts and defense costs, have been generally declining.
The division created a Torts Appellate Program in 2001. In FY 2006, the program handled 35 appeals, with a favorable result rate of 80 percent. Over the last five years, the division has an average win/loss ratio on appeals of 87 percent. The team is made up of a supervising attorney, two assistant attorneys general, and three paralegals and professional staff. The team handles not only appeals but also consults on significant motions and jury instructions.
The Torts Division has recently enhanced its early resolution program. The goal of the program is to achieve savings by early negotiation of lawsuits and claims arising from incidents for which the state is likely to be held liable. Experienced Torts attorneys not only attempt to limit the amount of tax dollars spent on tort payouts, but also provide advice, training and other risk management assistance to state agencies and institutions.
Back to top
Joshua Stepakoff v. Department of Corrections: Bufford Furrow, a parolee being supervised by the Department of Corrections, went on a shooting rampage in Los Angeles, killing one adult and wounding five plaintiff children. Plaintiffs claim that the Department was negligent in supervising Furrow.
Maria De La O v. Department of Social and Health Services and Maria Fernandez v. Department of Social and Health Services (consolidated): In De La O and Fernandez, approximately twenty-nine (29) plaintiffs allege violations of their civil rights when their in-home day care centers were entered and searched allegedly because of their Latino ancestry. Plaintiffs seek damages under the Washington law Against Discrimination and as part of an alleged conspiracy to deprive them of privileges and immunities under law because of their race or national origin. Plaintiffs also seek to enjoin state statutes and rules which authorized the disputed entry and search.
Daniel Albertson v. Department of Social and Health Services: Plaintiffs were placed by DSHS in a foster home run by Ronald Young and his wife. Plaintiffs allege that while there, plaintiffs were sexually assaulted by Young. Plaintiffs allege DSHS failed to properly supervise and monitor the home, failed to follow state licensing regulations and failed to adequately investigate the Young home.
Back to top
Dependency Cases: State law provides that DSHS can obtain a court order allowing temporary foster care for children who are suspected of being victims of abuse or neglect. DSHS, with legal assistance from the AGO, handles thousands of these dependency cases every year. In some cases, the courts ultimately decide to remove children from their parents permanently or for extended periods of time. However, in many cases children are returned to their parents after investigation or professional examination reveals that abuse likely did not occur. In the past it has always been thought that the state had no liability for obtaining temporary court orders to protect children. Recently, however, the courts have ruled that parents can sue and argue that the state “negligently investigated” the allegations of abuse or neglect which led to the court order for temporary foster care.
Juries have been awarding hundreds of thousands of dollars in these cases. This is a major legal development because there are hundreds of cases every year in which the state might now be sued for placing children in protective foster care.
“Parole” Liability Cases: In 1992, the State Supreme Court held that the Department of Corrections could be liable for crimes committed by released offenders who were under state post-release “supervision.” This has produced a huge increase in payout. In 1997, there was a large ($6.5 million) verdict against the state in one of these cases and in 1998 the state Supreme Court reaffirmed its decision allowing this liability and extended the liability to local government “probation” supervision. As a result of these developments there has been a large increase in lawsuits against the state by victims of crimes by released offenders under state supervision. The state now has several lawsuits and claims pending against it for murder, rape and other serious crimes by released offenders. Many of these suits represent multi-million dollar loss exposures for the state.
Back to top