# Gaylord v. Tacoma School District No. 10

> Washington Supreme Court · January 20, 1977 · 88 Wash. 2d 286

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9633919

## Case

- **Full name:** James M. Gaylord, Appellant, v. Tacoma School District No. 10, Et Al, Respondents
- **Court:** Washington Supreme Court
- **Decided:** January 20, 1977
- **Citations:** 88 Wash. 2d 286; 559 P.2d 1340; 15 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 7857; 16 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 596; 1977 Wash. LEXIS 754
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Utter
- **Judges:** Horowitz, Wright, Hamilton, Stafford, Brachtenbach, Kale, Tern, Dolliver, Utter
- **Cited by:** 23 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9633919

## Opinion text

Utter, J.
(concurring in the dissent) — I concur in the result reached by the dissent. At the conclusion of the only trial where testimony was taken, the court found, " 'There is no allegation or evidence that James Gaylord has ever committed any overt acts of homosexuality.'" Gaylord v. Tacoma School Dist. 10, 85 Wn.2d 348, 349 , 535 P.2d 804 (1975). After remand, with no additional testimony having been taken, the trial court entered a second finding on the same issue, stating, "it is unquestioned that homosexual acts were participated in by him, although there was no evidence of any overt acts having been committed." This finding is not supported by substantial evidence in the record.
*307 No one asked Gaylord whether he was involved in any overt act or acts. As the dissent points out, mere proof of the "status" of homosexuality is an insufficient basis for discharge of a teacher on the grounds of immorality. The burden of proof to establish something more was on the district, not Gaylord. The majority has concluded that Gaylord's admission of deep involvement with another male is sufficient to raise an inference of participation of immoral activity. His discharge should not be based upon this slimmest of inferences.
Dolliver, J., concurs with Utter, J.
Petition for rehearing denied April 15, 1977.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9633919. Public record. Not legal advice.