Skip to main content

Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 942099.pdf

Citation
Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 942099.pdf
Jurisdiction
Washington (state)
Source verification
official_capture_completeness_unverified

Full Text

1,783 chars
Waterville took retaliatory actions against him for filing the grievances, including

attempting to discharge him without probable cause. After the district court denied

Waterville's motion for summary judgment dismissal, the parties settled and Zhu

resigned from Waterville in March 2012.
For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.
Jin Zhu V. ESD 171, No. 94209-9

B. Jin Zhu v. North Central Educational Service District-ESD 171

Three months after resigning from Waterville, Zhu applied for a position as

a "Math-Science Specialist" with ESD 171. Pretrial order, Zhu v. N. Cent. Educ.

Serv. Dist-ESD 171, No. 2:15-CV-00183-JLQ, at 1 (E.D. Wash. Sept. 8, 2016).

ESD 171 is an educational service district that "[p]rovide[s] cooperative and

informational services to local school districts," including Waterville, RCW

28A.310.010(1), and it is undisputed that members ofESD Hi's hiring committee

were aware ofZhu's lawsuit against Waterville. Zhu was one ofthree candidates

interviewed, but ESD 171 ultimately hired a different candidate, whom Zhu claims

was far less qualified for the position. Zhu sued ESD 171 in federal district court,

alleging that it refused to hire him in retaliation for his prior lawsuit against

Waterville, thereby violating WLAD's antiretaliation statute, RCW 49.60.210(1),

as well as other state and federal laws.

ESD 171 moved for summary judgment dismissal, asserting that Zhu's

WLAD antiretaliation claim should fail for the same reasons that his federal

antiretaliation claim should fail. However,the district court correctly noted that

WLAD is not identical to federal law, analyzed the WLAD antiretaliation claim on

its merits, and denied summary judgment. ESD 171 moved to reconsider, arguing