The Washington Supreme Court ruled on September 3, 2026, that claims of negligent retention and vicarious liability can coexist in a lawsuit against police officers and their employer, the City of Tacoma. This decision stems from a case involving the fatal shooting of Jacqueline Salyers by Officer Scott Campbell during an arrest attempt. The ruling could have significant implications for how similar cases are handled in the future, particularly those involving police conduct and employer liability.
The case, Earl v. Campbell, No. 104495-0, was brought by Lisa Earl, who is the mother of Salyers. She filed the lawsuit not only on her own behalf but also on behalf of her deceased daughter's estate and other family members. The case centers on the actions of Officers Campbell and Aaron Joseph, who were involved in the incident that led to Salyers' death. Earl initially claimed that Campbell acted negligently and that the City was vicariously liable for his actions as he was acting within the scope of his employment.
However, as the case progressed, Earl discovered new evidence regarding Officer Joseph, including prior allegations of domestic violence. She sought to amend her complaint to include a negligent retention claim against the City, arguing that it had failed to act on the information regarding Officer Joseph's fitness for duty. The trial court allowed the amendment, but the City challenged this decision, leading to a ruling from the Washington Court of Appeals that stated the negligent retention claim could not coexist with the vicarious liability claim since both were based on the same set of facts.
In its ruling, the Washington Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals decision, stating that both claims are separate causes of action and can be included in a single lawsuit. The court emphasized that a negligent retention claim does not depend on whether an employee was acting within the scope of their employment when the incident occurred. Justice Johnson, writing for the court, stated, "We hold that both claims are separate causes of action and may be pleaded in a single claim." The court also noted that the scope of employment inquiry is not part of the negligent retention analysis.
The Supreme Court's decision clarifies that a plaintiff can pursue both a negligent retention claim and a vicarious liability claim against an employer, even when the employer concedes that its employee was acting within the scope of employment. This ruling is significant because it allows for greater accountability of employers, particularly in cases involving police officers who may pose a risk to the public.
The ruling has broader implications for future cases involving police liability and employer negligence. It underscores the importance of holding employers accountable for retaining employees who may be unfit for their positions, especially in law enforcement. The court's decision also aligns with the principles of allowing multiple legal theories to be presented in a case, which can provide a more comprehensive view of the circumstances surrounding an incident.
Looking ahead, the case will return to the trial court for further proceedings. The City of Tacoma may still seek to appeal the Supreme Court's ruling, but details regarding any potential appeal were not available in the court filing. The outcome of this case could influence how similar lawsuits are approached in Washington state and potentially set a precedent for other jurisdictions.