Spokane7
62°
April 15, 2010 in City
Wash. high court: Immigration status inadmissible
SEATTLE — The Washington state Supreme Court has ruled that a man’s undocumented immigrant status in the U.S. should not have been introduced in a trial while the man sought damages in a negligence lawsuit against a construction contractor.
In a 7-2 ruling, the state’s high court reversed a state Court of Appeals decision to uphold a jury verdict against Alex Salas.
The question before the court revolved around the issue of whether Salas’ immigration status affects his claim for future wages, given that he is illegally in the country.
The jury found the construction contractor had been negligent but did not award any monetary damages to him.
“I knew justice wasn’t being done,” said Salas’ attorney Robert B. Kornfeld. “Here you have someone who violates (workers’ safety) and they get away with it, because this guy was undocumented? That wasn’t right.”
A Mexican native, Salas was working on a construction project in Seattle in 2002 when he fell from a ladder provided by Hi-Tech Erectors.
He was seriously injured and sued the contractor two years later, alleging that the ladder did not meet safety codes. According to court documents, the day of the fall was wet, and the ladder did not have a textured surface to prevent slipping.
Salas suffered back, hip and ankle injures, including multiple fractures in joints. Kornfeld said Salas’ medical bills went up to $150,000 and that he faces a hip replacement. “Eventually one day, he will be very crippled,” Kornfeld said.
Salas sought up to a $1 million in damages.
But just before the lawsuit went to trial, Salas’ status as an illegal immigrant was revealed during the deposition of his psychiatrist. Salas’ team moved to exclude that fact from trial, pointing out that immigration was a hot-button issue that may cloud a jury’s ruling. But their request was denied.
Attorney Matthew Boyle, who represented Hi-Tech Erectors, said Salas had not disclosed his immigration status to him or his own lawyer.
“Up to that point in time, we both believed we worked here legally because that’s what he told us,” Boyle said.
Boyle, though, said that Salas’ immigration status wasn’t something his case revolved around. “It really wasn’t a central focus, we were defending on the liability issues.”
Salas entered the country in 1989 on a visa. Court documents state he applied for legal status, but did not hear back. His visa expired in 1994, and has since lived here undocumented. Salas is married and is a father of three. He now lives in Texas.
Boyle said they are weighing their options and may ask the high court to reconsider. Kornfeld said that they will seek a new trial if Hi-Tech Erectors does not want to settle.
The state Supreme Court said admitting Salas’ immigration status presented “the danger of unfair prejudice.”
Writing on behalf of the two justices who dissented, Justice Gerry L. Alexander said the trial court’s admission of Salas’ immigration status was not “manifestly unreasonable.”
© Copyright 2010 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Sex trafficking suspects released as probe continues 
Gabriele on April 15 at 2:10 p.m.
I feel the Wash State Supreme Court’s ruling is wrong. After all he should not have been in this country in the first place, since he was illegal, and therefore not be working. I’m not saying he should not get any money for his injuries from the construction company,because they wrong also by employing him in the first place, but to deny his illegal status to the public and getting a chance to escape eventuell deportation, is not fair to the many people who resided LEGALLY in the States for almost their entire life, and than be deported back to their country because of something they had done wrong in the US. If legal residents dont have a chance to stay in this country than ILLEGALS shouldn’t either. They already commited a crime by coming to the States illegally, but most off them get away with it and even get a chance to apply for legal resident status. What kind off Justice is that?
spokanada on April 15 at 2:47 p.m.
so if an immigrant is in the country illegally he can get murdered without anyone facing the consequences.
Same argument.
He will probably still be deported but his immigration status should not be considered in the negligence case.
pamstevensyperez on April 15 at 6:33 p.m.
The trial judge said that his status wouldn’t come in unless he was seeking damages for lost future employment. If he was going to be potentially deported wouldn’t that be relevant as to what his future income would be? What’s shocking about the majority opinion is that the majority said that it was unlikely that he would ever be deported and therefore it wasn’t relevant.
dallison on April 15 at 6:49 p.m.
If he is in this country illegally he should have no rights other than the right to be deported and the contractor should be fined for employing illegals!
Shylock13 on April 15 at 6:58 p.m.
Illegal immigrants should have no rights, except to be shipped back to their home country. Had he entered the country legally, that’s a different story. Now every illegal alien will fall down somewhere and sue for damages! Outrageous!!
misjustice on April 15 at 7:45 p.m.
Companies love to hire people that are undocumented because they can abuse them, use them, and then discard them when and as they wish. I do not condone individuals entering this country illegally; nor do I condone businesses that hire them and then take advantage of their immigration status.
More needs to be done to reign in illegal HIRING practices; if people could not be hired illegally, there would not be as many individuals coming to this country illegally. It’s the old wink, wink, nod, nod, to companies and the slam, bam against the individuals…
Both parts of the immigration problem need to be addressed; those that break our immigration laws, and those that break our hiring laws.
flutieflakes on April 15 at 10:06 p.m.
Screwing your employees can often lead to reduced costs. If the contractor were to be let off the hook because the worker is considered an “illegal alien”, it would only encourage employers to hire undocumented or “illegal” workers because it means that they can decrease their liabilities and cut costs by ignoring safety standards, all while knowing that they are protected by the fact that their employee is an “illegal alien”.