Clark County seeks new trial after losing discrimination lawsuit

Weeks after a federal jury told Clark County to pay $600,000 to three Latino employees over allegedly racist incidents at work, the county is now asking for a do-over.

Attorneys representing the county recently filed a motion asking U.S. District Court Judge David Estudillo to vacate the June 21 verdict that sided with the workers. They argue the trial saw “a number of unduly prejudicial events” that skewed in the workers’ favor.

The county’s attorneys — the Seattle-based firm Keating, Bucklin & McCormack — blame the plaintiffs’ attorneys. In recent court filings, they contend the lawyers “repeatedly” overstepped during the trial.

Among their concerns are that the plaintiffs’ team defied the judge’s orders with some of the questions they asked witnesses and showed material to jurors that the judge had already forbidden. That included asking about whether some witnesses were getting paid by the county to attend the trial.

“Plaintiffs’ counsel repeatedly and knowingly asked questions and presented arguments in violation of the courts’ orders, in addition to offering improper argument and displays to the jury throughout opening statements and closing arguments,” attorney Jayne Freeman wrote.

The three workers, Ray Alanis, Isaiah Hutson and Elias Peña, alleged being confronted with racist remarks and behaviors while working at Clark County’s public works department throughout 2018 and 2019. When they complained, they said, county officials turned a blind eye.

They reported that colleagues and direct supervisors called them “Manuel labor” or “the brown crew.” In one instance, a coworker reportedly pointed at two of the men and said “the country’s got too much cancer, there’s cancer here.”

Hutson said a coworker told the men that they “worked for a white slave master.” One coworker reportedly talked of admiring Adolf Hitler. Another coworker, who later won a promotion, allegedly said he was “building a border wall” around the public works facility.

The trio’s legal team is largely made up of staff attorneys for the civil rights nonprofit Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund.

Jurors ultimately sided with the men. While the jury said the county did not violate federal civil rights laws, the ruling found the county broke Washington state’s anti-discrimination laws.

In their recent court filings, Clark County’s lawyers contend the ruling was “substantially prejudiced” against the county.

County lawyers wrote that the judge prohibited evidence that county officials fired two workers for making racist remarks. They wrote the evidence would have shown county leadership and a supervisor being proactive.

In another instance, county attorneys criticized the court for allowing “hearsay evidence” when discussing whether the trio faced retaliation. One witness had allegedly heard another county worker say the men would be “done” working at the county after the lawsuit.

The attorneys called it “untrue gossip” that “the jury should not have been allowed to consider.”

In response to the trial appeal, lawyers for Alanis, Hutson and Peña said they acted professionally and argued the county mischaracterized any missteps.

For example, the attorneys said they could legally ask county workers if they had been paid to attend the trial as witnesses. They said that the judge considered the question irrelevant, but that ruling didn’t prohibit the question.

MALDEF staff attorney Fernando Nuñez said in a statement that the county’s concerns don’t warrant a new trial.

“Clark County refuses to accept the verdict reached by an impartial jury, choosing instead to extend an already exhaustive process for our clients,” Nuñez said.

Alanis, Hutson and Peña all continue to work for the county, according to their attorneys.

On Monday, Clark County officials did not respond to multiple questions, such as whether the county has made any policy or personnel changes or whether losing the lawsuit will impact county finances.