LA Angels Tuesday News Crash: Trout-O-Graphs

Would like anyone opinion on yesterday’s trails situation:

SANTA ANA, Calif — As the family of Tyler Skaggs prepares to wrap up its case, its final witness before the holiday break argued that Eric Kay should have been fired by the Los Angeles Angels long before the pitcher’s death.

Ramona Powell, an expert in Human Resources, testified on Friday that Angels should have fired Kay, the ex-communications director, years before he gave the fentanyl-laced pill that killed pitcher Tyler Skaggs, and that the team continually failed to follow its own policies in addressing Kay’s behavior.

Asked if she had ever seen a case like this in her decades-long HR career, Powell simply said, “No.”

Kay is serving 22 years in federal prison for providing the aforementioned pill that killed Skaggs on July 1, 2019. Skaggs’ family is suing the team for wrongful death, alleging the club knew or should have known that Kay was giving players drugs. Kay voluntarily resigned from the Angels in November 2019, while receiving a severance package, according to his ex-wife, Camela Kay.

“It wouldn’t have gotten to this point, to be honest, if I was running the HR team and these things were happening,” Powell said. “In 2019, he wouldn’t have been there.”

Powell was the final witness before a week-long break in the trial for Thanksgiving, and the penultimate witness in the Skaggs’ case. She was paid by the Skaggs legal team to testify, but noted under oath she doesn’t testify in cases if she doesn’t believe in the party’s argument. The Skaggs side will call their final witness on the morning of Dec. 1, and then the Angels will have two weeks to present their defense before the jury begins deliberations.

Powell’s testimony highlighted what she said were copious missteps over the years in addressing Kay’s conduct. A key contention in this case is whether the Angels followed their own policies, with the HR and executive staff’s actions being put under the microscope throughout the entire trial.

On direct examination by Skaggs attorney Daniel Dutko, Powell noted instances in which she said the Angels did not follow their own policies, and failed to reasonably manage Kay and his addiction.

Cross-examination by Angels attorney Kevin Dorse included many questions that were, as the judge said, calling for speculation or were outside the scope of Powell’s direct examination and area of expertise. Dorse seemingly tried to highlight the reasonableness of the Angels’ actions and contrast Kay’s behavior with Skaggs’.

When questioned by Dutko, Powell highlighted a doctor’s note that allowed Kay to return to work from a six-week outpatient rehab absence in 2019, a month before Skaggs died.

The note simply read “leave extended till 5/31/19”, which Angels VP for HR Deborah Johnston had previously testified was adequate for Kay to return. However, Powell noted that the Angels’ own policies require specific dates of return to work and specifics on any work restrictions. The note was also a screenshot in a text, not an actual note, which Powell said made it problematic.

“This is not a return to work note,” Powell said. “This is an extension of a leave.”

Powell said that on numerous occasions, there would have been reason to investigate Kay and terminate him, but no investigation ever occurred. She said that a justified investigation would have led to checking Kay’s emails and that the team should have subsequently contacted law enforcement regarding the use of his work email to purchase drugs on the OfferUp web platform.

Johnston had testified that references to Oxy in the emails would have made her think it was a reference to OxiClean cleaning products, rather than the drug OxyContin. An email about Roxy shirts, Johnston said, would have led her to think “female shirts,” and a mention of “blue m30 lego studs, made in Mexico” wouldn’t have raised an issue, since Kay had children.

Powell said that finding baggies of drugs at Kay’s home, which Kay’s ex-wife, Camela Kay, said occurred on Oct. 2, 2017, could have also led to contacting police.

Dorse’s cross-examination was interrupted early to conduct a public sidebar, outside the view of the jury. The Angels’ lawyer had begun asking questions surrounding the Angels’ treatment of Kay and how it corresponded to MLB’s policies — which has become a huge point of contention in this trial and was again during Dorse’s questioning.

The Angels have argued that the team was following MLB’s guidelines by sending Kay for treatment to their team-hired Employee Assistance Professional, Dr. Erik Abell. The Skaggs side has argued that MLB’s policies require direct reporting to the league, as stated in MLB’s policy.

Johnston, the Angels’ HR director, testified under oath on Nov. 10 that the Angels did notify MLB of Kay’s abuse and that he was being treated and tested under MLB’s policy. A league spokesperson told The Athletic that the league was never notified of Kay’s addiction or involved in his treatment.

The judge wouldn’t allow Dorse to ask Powell about MLB policy, since it was outside the scope of Angels team policies — her hired area of expertise.

This, in part, led to objections to Dorse’s questions being sustained dozens of times during his cross-examination. And at times, it was unclear what the defense was trying to argue. At one point, Dorse went through an entire line of questioning about the positivity that Kay brought to the job.

“Eric Kay loved his job. Do you understand that? Are you aware of that?” the Angels attorney asked.

“Did you know that (Angels PR employee Grace McNamee) had a nickname for Kay, ‘Big Sunshine’?”

“Does it make sense that media reporters are very observant at their job?” Dorse asked, which was objected to and sustained. He then asked, “Would you agree you haven’t seen a single complaint from any of the media about how Eric did his job?”

Powell said she didn’t look for media complaints and wasn’t clear on whether there is even a reporting apparatus for media to file a complaint.

Dorse attempted to challenge Powell’s credentials and expertise by pointing out that she did not have a college degree. Powell responded by saying she has spent decades in the HR field, but finished a few credits short of graduation due to a family emergency. He also questioned her experience by asking, “You have not been an expert witness in any case involving a professional sports team, is that right?” Powell responded by saying, “No, that is not right. I have worked for professional sports teams in my role as an expert witness.”

At the heart of Dorse’s questioning was an argument that the Angels acted reasonably. Regarding the doctor’s note under contention, Dorse asked if the note implied that Kay could return to work without restrictions.

“Not at all,” Powell replied.

Similarly, Dorse asked about the Angels placing Kay in outpatient rehab in 2019, which led to him being tested as part of his treatment. “Wasn’t it a positive that the Angels gave Eric six weeks off in that 2019 timeframe to go through the program?” Dorse asked.

“I testified that 2019 wouldn’t have happened if reasonable HR practices would have been followed,” Powell responded, later noting that Kay was never drug tested under the Angels’ policy.

Lastly, Dorse tried to argue, through his questions, that the Angels couldn’t have fired Kay, since it meant they would have been favoring a player over a regular employee.

“Do you agree it’s a bona fide concern for employers in California if they favor a prominent, rich employee and don’t treat [them] similarly to a normal office worker,” Dorse asked.

Powell responded by bringing up testimony she’d read from earlier in the trial — in which the Angels terminated a 63-year-old custodian for drinking a White Claw during her lunch break, without realizing the beverage was alcoholic. “That was more of a concern of inconsistency to me,” Powell said.

A similar question was asked by Dorse, which led to another objection. Dutko even seemed to make light of all the various objections that had been sustained during the cross-examination.

“Does it bother any of your HR instincts that the plaintiffs’ claim in this case is that a celebrity millionaire athlete should be able to engage in drug conduct at work in any way similar to Eric Kay, and not be terminated?” Dorse asked.

“Do I even need to say the objections?” Dutko said. “I mean, I am happy to say them for the record.”

The judge asked, “So you object,” to which Dutko said, “Yes, I object.”

The objection was sustained.

Court will not resume until the start of December, with the entire week of Thanksgiving off. The Angels have been expressing concern to the judge that they will not have adequate time to present their defense, asking the judge to require Skaggs lawyers to end their case earlier last week.

The judge noted to both parties on Wednesday that the vast majority of the Skaggs’ witnesses have also been designated as witnesses by the Angels. That, the judge said, meant that the Angels have been putting on their case throughout the majority of the Skaggs’ case in chief.

One of those witnesses designated by both sides was Skaggs’ stepfather, Dan Ramos. In completing his testimony on Friday, Ramos was asked by Angels attorneys about text messages indicating Skaggs was using opiates to recover from Tommy John surgery, despite Skaggs kicking a Percocet addiction the year prior.

In a text message, Skaggs himself referred to his 2013 Percocet use as an “addiction.” Ramos — who said he helped Skaggs get clean in 2013 — testified that he didn’t remember how he assisted Skaggs in doling out his post-surgery medication. Angels lawyer Elizabeth Lachman also accused Ramos of being “a source of pressure” for Skaggs, citing a 2016 text message in which Ramos — who worked as a coach for his step-son — chided him about not pitching through injuries.

Ramos also denied knowledge of the whereabouts of his son, Garet Ramos, whom the Angels view as a key witness in their case. The team believes Garet deleted a text message from Skaggs’ phone after he died, but has been unable to locate him for questioning.

The Angels will have two weeks for their defense, with testimony expected to wrap on Dec. 12. Previously, Dec. 5 had been an off-day for the trial due to the Angels’ law firm’s holiday party. However, a half day was added to the calendar for that day, and deposition videos will be played for the jury.

Deliberations are expected to occur Dec. 15-17.