 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Roberts v. Dudley9/18/1998
Source of Appeal: Appeal from Superior Court of Pierce County Docket No: 94-2-07362-7 Judgement or order under review Date filed: 01/16/96 judge signing: Hon. Thomas J. Felnagle
Judges Authored by J. Dean Morgan concurring Elaine M. Houghton Carroll C. Bridgewater
PUBLISHED
Lynne Roberts worked for Eric G. Dudley, a veterinarian with fewer than eight employees. Dudley discharged her, allegedly because she was female. She sued, claiming a common law, non-statutory cause of action for gender discrimination. Declining to recognize such a cause of action, the trial court dismissed. We reverse and remand.
Roberts began working at the North End Veterinary Clinic on December 4, 1972. She was still employed there when Dudley purchased the clinic in July 1991. Since then, Dudley has had fewer than eight employees.
In the fall of 1992, Roberts was pregnant. On February 1, 1993, she began six weeks of unpaid maternity leave. Near the end of that period, Dudley asked her to take another six weeks of unpaid leave, which she did. On May 1, 1993, Dudley discharged her, saying he had suffered a slowdown in business.
In May 1994, Dudley advertised Roberts' former position, which he had never filled. Roberts re-applied, but Dudley hired someone else.
On July 18, 1994, Roberts filed a complaint for gender discrimination in which she alleged that at all times pertinent herein, plaintiff had performed and was performing her duties as a receptionist/office manager for the North End Veterinary Clinic in a satisfactory manner. The reason given for her termination is pretextual and not true. Plaintiff asserts that the reason for her termination was that she had become pregnant and delivered a child and that she was, therefore, discharged in violation of {RCW} 49.60.030 which provides that she has the right to be free from discrimination because of sex.{}
Later, Roberts filed a second amended complaint in which she modified her reliance on RCW 49.60. She alleged that at all times petinent herein, plaintiff had performed and was performing her duties as a receptionist/office manager for the North End Veterinary Clinic in a satisfactory manner. The reason given for her termination is pretextual and not true. Plaintiff asserts that the reason for her termination was that she had become pregnant and delivered a child and that she was, therefore, wrongfully terminated in violation of public policy and City of Tacoma Ordinance 1.29 et seq. which provides that she has the right to be free from employment discrimination because of her sex. Plaintiff asserts that her termination was wrongful in that it violated public policy against such discrimination as set forth in RCW 49.60 et seq., Tacoma Municipal Code 1.29 et seq., 42 U.S.C. 2000e(k) and/or Washington State Equal Rights amendment, Article 31 sec. 1 of the Washington State Constitution.{}
On October 12, 1995, Dudley moved for summary Judgement. He argued that Roberts had no cause of action under state law, even if he had discharged her because of sex, because he employed fewer than eight persons. In effect, though not expressly, he took the position that an employer's duty not to discriminate because of sex is purely statutory; that the statute, RCW 49.60, does not apply to employers with fewer than eight employees; and thus that an employer with fewer than eight employees is free to discriminate on the basis of sex if he or she wishes to do so. The trial court granted the motion.
After the trial court's ruling, Roberts sought direct review by the Supreme Court. Dudley agreed that direct review would be appropriate. The Supreme Court denied d
Page 1 2 3 Washington Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|