Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 845926.pdf
- Citation
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 845926.pdf
- Jurisdiction
- Washington (state)
- Source verification
- official_capture_completeness_unverified
- Original Source
- https://www.courts.wa.gov/opinions/pdf/845926.pdf ↗
Related Parts of This Source
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 845926.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 845926.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 845926.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 845926.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 845926.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 845926.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 845926.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 845926.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 845926.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 845926.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 845926.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 845926.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 845926.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 845926.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 845926.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 845926.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 845926.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 845926.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 845926.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 845926.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 845926.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 845926.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 845926.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 845926.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 845926.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 845926.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 845926.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 845926.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 845926.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 845926.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 845926.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 845926.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 845926.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 845926.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 845926.pdf
Full Text
1,759 charsFirst, the plaintiff must make a prima facie case of discrimination by showing that (1) she was within a statutorily protected class, (2) she was discharged by the defendant, (3) she was doing satisfactory work, and (4) after her discharge, the position remained open and the employer continued to seek applicants with qualifications similar to the plaintiff. If the plaintiff establishes a prima facie case, it creates a rebuttable presumption of discrimination. Second, the burden shifts to the defendant, who must “articulate a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for the adverse employment action.” Third, if the defendant meets this burden, the plaintiff must produce sufficient evidence showing that the defendant's alleged nondiscriminatory reason for the adverse employment action was a pretext. Mikkelsen, 189 Wn.2d at 527 (citations omitted). The trial court found that Dr. Litvack met the first prong and established a prima facie case of gender discrimination. The court also found that UW met the second prong and produced evidence of legitimate nondiscriminatory reasons for not renewing Dr. Litvack’s appointment. 5 At issue is step three: whether Dr. Litvack produced evidence that UW’s asserted nondiscriminatory reasons were merely a pretext. The trial court found that Dr. Litvack presented no evidence creating a genuine issue of fact on whether (1) Dr. Futran’s reasons were merely a pretext for a discriminatory purpose or (2) even though Dr. Futran’s reasons were legitimate, discrimination still was a substantial factor motivating his decision. 5 Dr. Litvack does not challenge the trial court’s finding on prong two. -15- For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/. No. 84592-6-I/16