In Blackburn v. Dep’t of Soc. & Health Servs., nine employees at a Washington state psychiatric hospital alleged racial discrimination after the hospital restricted job assignments. The Washington State Supreme Court found the temporary race-based restriction violated the Washington Law Against Discrimination.
In Hall v. BNSF Railway Company, the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington found that a homosexual male employee stated a valid gender discrimination claim against his employer for denying health benefits to his husband. The Court refused to dismiss what it determined to be a valid gender discrimination claim where the male employee and his male partner were legally married and BNSF provided coverage for the male spouses of female employees.
In Sambasivan v. Kadlec Medical Center, Division III of the Washington State Court of Appeals, overturned the dismissal of a doctor’s racial discrimination and retaliation claims. The Indian doctor sued the Hospital after it implemented a proficiency standard that prevented him from practicing his specialty. The trial court dismissed his claims, finding that the doctor lacked the necessary relationships with the Hospital to allow his lawsuit. However, the Court of Appeals reversed that decision, holding that such claims could be brought when the Hospital interfered with the doctor’s right to make additional contracts with the Hospital and obtain new patients when the doctor was acting as an independent contractor for the Hospital in certain functions.
In Davis v. State of Washington, the Washington State Court of Appeals, Division I, reversed the dismissal of a gender and race discrimination claim filed by a Washington State Patrol Cadet. The former Cadet sued the State of Washington claiming that race and gender played a substantial role in the Washington State Patrol Training Academy’s decision to terminate her from the program. The trial court dismissed the lawsuit before trial after determining that the State had provided a legitimate reason for terminating the Cadet. The Court of Appeals reversed the dismissal finding that the Cadet had shown that, even if a legitimate reason existed for her termination, the decision still might have been substantially motivated by race or gender discrimination.
In Ockletree v. Franciscan Health Systems, 27 AD Cases 442 (W.D. Wash. 2012), a Washington federal district court refused to dismiss the plaintiff’s ADA claims against a religious hospital when the discriminatory action was not religiously motivated. Whether the religious exemption under the Washington Law against Discrimination (WLAD) applied to non-religious based discriminatory firings by religious institutions is currently an unanswered question in Washington. Although there was no actual record that the claims had been timely filed, the SOL may have been longer if the WLAD did apply to this claim, so dismissal for untimely firing could not be decided at this point. The court dismissed the plaintiff’s discharge in violation of public policy claim, holding that the statutory remedies were sufficient and therefore precluded a common-law claim.
