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
- Original Source
- https://www.courts.wa.gov/opinions/pdf/387844_pub.pdf ↗
Related Parts of This Source
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 387844_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 387844_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 387844_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 387844_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 387844_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 387844_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 387844_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 387844_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 387844_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 387844_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 387844_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 387844_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 387844_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 387844_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 387844_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 387844_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 387844_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 387844_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 387844_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 387844_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 387844_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 387844_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 387844_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 387844_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 387844_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 387844_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 387844_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 387844_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 387844_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 387844_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 387844_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 387844_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 387844_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 387844_pub.pdf
Full Text
1,712 charsSaunders v. Lloyd’s of London, 113 Wn.2d 330, 340, 779 P.2d 249 (1989). Equitable estoppel focuses on justifiable reliance. Buchanan v. Switzerland Gen. Ins. Co., 76 Wn.2d 100, 108, 455 P.2d 344 (1969). Also, a court will apply equitable estoppel only to prevent a manifest injustice. Kramarevcky v. Department of Social & Health Services, 122 Wn.2d 738, 743-44, 863 P.2d 535 (1993). Injustice results from an employer relying on terms of an agreement that retaliates against an employee for bringing a racial discrimination claim. WSU cannot and does not argue it justifiably relied on the promise contained in paragraph 3 of the settlement agreement with Saleh Elgiadi. 15 For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/. No. 38784-4-III Elgiadi v. Washington State University Judicial Estoppel When arguing judicial estoppel, WSU does not independently analyze the elements of the doctrine. WSU does not enlighten the court on how judicial estoppel trumps the highest of priority in preventing discrimination and retaliation. Judicial estoppel prevents a party from asserting one position in a judicial proceeding and later taking an inconsistent position to gain an advantage. Ashmore v. Estate of Duff, 165 Wn.2d 948, 951, 205 P.3d 111 (2009); Arkison v. Ethan Allen, Inc., 160 Wn.2d 535, 538, 160 P.3d 13 (2007). The doctrine seeks to preserve respect for judicial proceedings and to avoid inconsistency, duplicity, and waste of time. Cunningham v. Reliable Concrete Pumping, Inc., 126 Wn. App. 222, 225, 108 P.3d 147 (2005); Johnson v. Si-Cor, Inc., 107 Wn. App. 902, 906, 28 P.3d 832 (2001). Three factors inform whether judicial estoppel should apply: