Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 43703-1-II Published Opinion.pdf

8
Discrimination ( WLAD), alleging disparate treatment, harassment, discrimination, and

retaliation based on his combat veteran, disabled person, and Mexican -American statuses.

Qwest moved for summary judgment. The superior court ruled that Qwest was entitled to

judgment as a matter of law, granted summary judgment to Qwest, and dismissed Alonso' s

WLAD complaint. Alonso appeals.

ANALYSIS

We review summary judgment orders de novo, viewing the facts in the light most

favorable to the nonmoving party. Vallandigham v. Clover Park Sch. Dist. No. 400, 154 Wn.2d

16, 26, 109 P. 3d 805 ( 2005). Trial courts properly grant summary judgment where the pleadings

and affidavits show no genuine issue of material fact and the moving party is entitled to

judgment as a matter of law. CR 56( c).

I. DISPARATE TREATMENT CLAIM

Alonso first argues that, because he established a prima facie disparate treatment claim

under both the direct evidence and McDonnell Douglas tests, the superior court erred when it

improperly determined that Qwest was entitled to summary judgment as a matter of law.

Viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to Alonso, we hold that Alonso produced

Ch. 49. 60 RCW.

9
McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U. S. 792, 93 S. Ct. 1817, 36 L. Ed. 2d 668 ( 1973).

el
              

No. 43703 -1 - II

sufficient evidence to establish a prima facie disparate treatment claim under the direct evidence

test. 10 Thus, the superior court improperly granted Qwest summary judgment on this claim.
A. Rules of Law

Disparate treatment occurs when an employer treats some people less favorably than

others because of race, color, religion, sex, or other protected status. Hegwine v. Longview Fibre