Skip to main content

Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 387844_pub.pdf

Citation
Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 387844_pub.pdf
Jurisdiction
Washington (state)
Source verification
official_capture_completeness_unverified

Related Parts of This Source

Full Text

1,737 chars
No. 38784-4-III
Elgiadi v. Washington State University

clause? Fourth, is Elgiadi judicially estopped from challenging the no-reapply

clause? Fifth, did the settlement Agreement work an accord and satisfaction? Sixth,

if the clause is void and if Elgiadi neither waived nor is estopped from denying the

validity of the clause, should this court void the entire settlement Agreement or only

strike the clause from the agreement? I answer the questions as follows: (1) yes, based

on RCW 49.60.210(1), (2) no, (3) no, (4) no, (5) no, and (6) remand to the superior court

for further proceedings on whether to strike the clause or void the agreement. Therefore,

I dissent from the majority’s ruling.

RCW 49.60.210(1)

The letter and spirit of RCW 49.60.210 compel the negation of a provision in an

agreement settling an employment discrimination claim, which provision precludes the

employee from seeking further employment with the employer. By insisting on the

employee agreeing to a no-reapply clause, the employer engages in retaliation for

asserting the original discrimination claim. The settling employer treats the employee

differently because of his or her having asserted the discrimination claim against the

employer.

RCW 49.60.210(1) declares:

It is an unfair practice for any employer, employment agency, labor
union, or other person to discharge, expel, or otherwise discriminate against
any person because he or she has opposed any practices forbidden by this

2
For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.

No. 38784-4-III
Elgiadi v. Washington State University

chapter, or because he or she has filed a charge, testified, or assisted in any
proceeding under this chapter.