Case law

Zelton v. FedEx Express Corporation

District Court, W.D. Washington · Aug 26, 2025

As a result, Plaintiff does not 8 establish a prima facie showing of racial discrimination. 9 2. … It “typically 24 consists of clearly sexist, racist, or similarly discriminatory statements or actions by the 1 employer.” Id.

Wilder v. Whitehouse

District Court, W.D. Washington · Jul 10, 2023

“immunity.” Id. at 7. Last, Ms. Wilder urges the Court to “void[] 14 and rescind[]” several provisions in an unidentified contract. Id. 15 Judge Christel ordered Ms. … Wilder to file an amended petition 21 “that names a proper respondent and clearly identifies the constitutional violations alleged.”

Tapia v. NaphCare Inc

District Court, W.D. Washington · Jan 17, 2024

Like 11 other qualified privileges, it may be waived.” United States v. … who made the disclosure cannot 20 subsequently claim work-product immunity.”

Olson v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, W.D. Washington · Dec 18, 2024

Thus, “an ALJ may find that a claimant 2 lacks a medically severe impairment or combination of impairments only when his conclusion is 3 ‘clearly established by medical evidence.’” Webb v. … Furthermore, the ALJ’s conclusion of 16 no severe medical impairment or combination of impairments was not supported by clearly 17 established medical evidence.

Russell v. Lyons

District Court, W.D. Washington · Jan 30, 2023

Additionally, Plaintiff is able to clearly articulate his 24 1 requests in a way that is understandable to the Court. … While Plaintiff may be able to better 2 litigate this case with appointed counsel, that fact, alone, does not establish an extraordinary 3 circumstance warranting the appointment of counsel.

McCluskey v. Trustees of Red Dot Corp. Employee Stock Ownership Plan

268 F.R.D. 670 · District Court, W.D. Washington · Apr 23, 2010

Plaintiffs claims are typical of those of the class as a whole. 1 Plaintiff has demonstrated that he will fairly and adequately protect the interests of class members, and that counsel is highly qualified by his experience … Thus, the proposed class clearly falls within Rule 23(b)(1)(B), because adjudications with respect to individual class members would impact the interests of the other members not parties to this action, and could substantially

Pena v. Clark County

District Court, W.D. Washington · Apr 28, 2023

single grievance without 23 “spend[ing] a significant amount of extra time simply to receive compensation to which [an 24 1 employee] was clearly … Based on this evidence, Plaintiffs have clearly raised a dispute 18 of material fact from which a reasonable jury could conclude Plaintiffs’ work environment to be 19 both subjectively and objectively hostile such that

Kinzle v. Obenland

District Court, W.D. Washington · Aug 21, 2020

The state court’s application of clearly established law must be objectively 25 unreasonable.” Lockyer v. … First, he argues that deference is inappropriate because the state court decision was 16 contrary to clearly established federal law under Strickland and Lafler. (See Dkt. No. 86 at 2–4, 17 14.)

City of Seattle v. Monsanto Company

District Court, W.D. Washington · Dec 1, 2023

by 19 inhalation of both vapor phase and particulate-bound PCBs in air”; (2) exposure to PCBs 20 increases the risk of many different diseases, “including an increased risk of developing cancer, 21 suppression of immune … Expert testimony is not 13 excluded for relevancy where “it speaks clearly and directly to an issue in dispute in the case, 14 and . . . it will not mislead the jury.” Daubert II, 43 F.3d at 1321 n.17. Though Dr.

State of Washington v. The GEO Group Inc

District Court, W.D. Washington · Dec 8, 2021

That page went on to say, "The three elements that must be established in 11 order to sustain a claim based on unjust enrichment are: a benefit conferred upon the defendant 12 by the plaintiff; an appreciation or knowledge … the listed constraints requirements, including the restraint (s), which requires "alignment with 5 external sources," which includes the Attorney General, which is a state law enforcement 6 organization as GEO should clearly

Brown v. Brennan

District Court, W.D. Washington · Mar 1, 2022

Dkt. 12 at 14–18. 3 While Brown’s allegations may not have been clearly briefed and argued, the 4 evidence provided is sufficient to create a disputed issue of material … Brown 8 complaining to Bacon about nepotism does not qualify as protected activity under the 9 ADEA.

Many Cultures, One Message v. Clements

830 F. Supp. 2d 1111 · District Court, W.D. Washington · Nov 8, 2011

Instead, [the plaintiffs] primarily rely on “the clearly articulated fears of individuals, well experienced in the political process. ” ... … This characterization, though, clearly misstates the holding in that case.

Bonta, LLC v. City of Marysville

District Court, W.D. Washington · Nov 14, 2019

As established above, Bonta has failed to establish a prima facie case for either claim. As such, the Court will grant the City’s Motion for Summary Judgment as to both claims. 18 C. … subjects... any citizen > of the United States . . . to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the 3 || Constitution and laws .. .); 42 U.S.C.

Jackson v. The Aliera Companies Inc

District Court, W.D. Washington · May 26, 2020

Insurance is a contract whereby one undertakes to 12 indemnify another or pay a specified amount upon determinable contingencies.”). 13 Taking Plaintiffs’ plausible allegations as true, Plaintiffs have sufficiently established … Because Trinity’s dispute resolution procedures clearly require more than “one 13 || level of internal review before issuing a final determination” and binding arbitration that deprives 14 || the Court of the jurisdiction

Barsness v. United States

District Court, W.D. Washington · Aug 14, 2025

Barsness Establishes Care with VAPS in February 2018 5 In February 2018, when he was 39 years old, Barsness established care with the VA Puget 6 Sound (“VAPS”) health care system. Dkt. … The Court finds him to be qualified to offer his opinion. 13 (b) Dr.

Moore v. Effectual Inc

District Court, W.D. Washington · Mar 13, 2024

As this Court views the evidence presented by both parties, there is clearly a 9 genuine dispute of fact material to elements of these claims. … 2022), aff’d in part, vacated in part, remanded, 83 F.4th 87 (1st Cir. 2023) (“the 21 record suggests that plaintiffs’ opposition to receiving the COVID-19 vaccine”—i.e., that God 22 has instilled them with adequate immune

Chinn v. Whidbey Public Hospital District

District Court, W.D. Washington · Nov 22, 2021

McDaniel’s assumption is clearly noted in his 16 report. Id. However, Plaintiff “does not dispute that any mitigating income must be 17 deducted from the economic losses . . . .” … Have profits been reinvested in capital assets and have reserves been established? 12 If so, how should they be treated in a mitigation context.

Gustafson

District Court, W.D. Washington · Jul 14, 2026

protected class; (2) they were qualified for their positions; (3) they experienced an adverse 12 13 employment action; and (4) similarly situated … These failures are not remedied by plaintiffs’ attempts to 12 13 argue, in response to defendants’ motion to dismiss, that plaintiffs “quite clearly

Smith v. NaphCare Inc

District Court, W.D. Washington · Mar 13, 2023

At first blush, these allegations appear to allege an established practice of understaffing or failing to 18 employ qualified providers. But Plaintiffs do not allege understaffing or Dr. … However, Plaintiffs’ 22 allegations are clearly distinguishable.

Dawn Dakisha Jackson v. MKRP LLC et al.

District Court, W.D. Washington · Nov 12, 2025

The party asserting jurisdiction has the burden of 3 establishing it. See United States v. Orr Water Ditch Co., 600 F.3d 1152, 1157 (9th Cir. 2010). 4 B. Ms. … Jackson chooses to file an amended complaint, she must clearly 15 identify the basis for this Court’s subject matter jurisdiction, the defendant(s), the claim(s) 16 asserted, the specific facts she believes support the