Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 857088.pdf

Citation: Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 857088.pdf
Jurisdiction: Washington (state)
Source verification: official_capture_completeness_unverified
Original Source: https://www.courts.wa.gov/opinions/pdf/857088.pdf ↗

Related Parts of This Source

Full Text

1,748 chars

meetings for reasons other than diverticulitis.

Third, Bittner avers that Symetra’s act of replacing him while he was on

medical leave is itself evidence of a discriminatory animus. The record belies this

assertion. Symetra did not require Bittner to return to work before his doctor had

medically cleared him to do so, nor did Symetra force Bittner to perform duties that

exacerbated or interfered with his management of his gastrointestinal issues. To

the contrary, Symetra allowed Bittner to remain on leave and retain his employee

benefits, and Symetra’s leave consultant encouraged Bittner to apply for long-term

disability coverage through the company after his short-term disability expired.

- 26 -
For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.
No. 85708-8-I

Even construing the evidence in the light most favorable to Bittner, it is apparent

that Symetra’s employment decisions were not motivated by Bittner’s health issues

but instead by his performance deficiencies and workplace behavioral issues (and

potentially retaliation, as discussed above). Because Bittner has failed to show

pretext or that disability discrimination was a substantial factor motivating

Symetra’s decision-making, he has not met his burden under the third McDonnell

Douglas step. 14 Therefore, the trial court correctly dismissed Bittner’s WLAD

failure to accommodate claim on summary judgment.

IV

Bittner argues we should vacate the trial court’s award of $30,904.23 in

costs to Symetra under RCW 4.84.010 following the jury trial because it is no

longer a prevailing party. Because we reverse the trial court’s summary judgment

ruling on Bittner’s WLAD retaliation claims and vacate the trial court’s final