Summary
The Washington Supreme Court affirmed liability against the Wilsons’ marital community for Douglas Wilson’s sexual abuse of Andrew Clayton, holding that the abuse occurred while Wilson was conducting community business. The court also upheld voiding a property transfer that conveyed more than 90 percent of the community assets to Mary Kay Wilson as fraudulent. Finally, the court held that substantial evidence supported the award of $200,000 in future lost wages.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the Wilsons' marital community was liable for Douglas Wilson's intentional torts because the abuse occurred while he was conducting community business.
- Whether the Wilsons' property transfer was void as fraudulent under the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act and Washington common law.
- Whether Clayton proved future lost wages with sufficient evidence.
Holdings
- A marital community is liable for an intentional tort committed by one spouse when the tort occurs in the course of managing or conducting community business or is intended to benefit the community. Douglas Wilson's sexual abuse of Clayton occurred while he was using community employment, property, and supervisory relationships, so the Wilsons' marital community was liable.
- deElche did not alter LaFramboise's rule governing community-business torts; it changed the approach only for separate torts having no conceivable connection with community property or affairs.
- The property transfer from the Wilsons' marital community to Mary Kay Wilson was properly voided as fraudulent.
- A plaintiff need not establish a particular preinjury earning capacity as a prerequisite to recovering future lost wages; the evidence need only provide a reasonable basis for estimating the loss and avoid speculation or conjecture. Clayton presented substantial evidence supporting the $200,000 award.
Key quotations
“LaFramboise’s approach to community liability remains good law.” (65)
“The deElche case altered our approach to liability only for separate torts, not community torts.” (65)
“We hold the Wilsons’ marital community is liable for Mr. Wilson’s intentional torts because he committed them while conducting community business.” (68)
“In sum Clayton presented substantial evidence to support the trial court’s finding his future lost wages are $200,000.” (72)
Factual background
Douglas Wilson sexually abused Andrew Clayton more than 40 times between Clayton's ninth and fifteenth or sixteenth years while Clayton performed yard work for properties owned by the Wilsons' marital community. Wilson used the yard-work employment, landlord-tenant relationship, and community funds to facilitate and pay for the abuse. After Wilson's arrest and while the couple knew that Clayton and other victims could sue, the Wilsons transferred approximately 90.5 percent of their community assets to Mary Kay Wilson, and later dissolved their marriage.
Procedural history
After a bench trial, the King County Superior Court awarded Clayton approximately $1.4 million, imposed liability against the marital community and the Wilsons, enjoined disposition of former community property pending an accounting, and voided the Wilsons' property agreement as fraudulent. The Court of Appeals unanimously affirmed. The Supreme Court granted review and affirmed.
Remand instructions
The Court of Appeals had directed the trial court to amend conclusion of law 8 to clarify that Mary Kay Wilson was liable to Clayton only to the extent of former community property, not her separate property.