IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON
REYNALDO S. VERDUZCO, ) No. 103749-0
)
Petitioner, )
)
v. ) EN BANC
)
KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, )
) Filed: June 11, 2026
Respondent. )
______________________________ )
MONTOYA-LEWIS, J.—An employee sued an employer for employment
discrimination and retaliation in violation of the Washington Law Against
Discrimination (WLAD). RCW 49.60.030(1)(a), .210(1). Both claims require proof
the employer took an adverse employment action. Although neither the legislature
nor this court has defined an “adverse employment action,” the Washington Pattern
Jury Instructions (WPI) Committee offers pattern instructions defining the term for
each of those claims. In this case, the trial court issued a jury instruction that
combined both WPI definitions. The jury found the employer did not discriminate
but did retaliate against the employee, and the employer appealed.
The narrow question presented is whether the jury instruction was misleading.
For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.
Verduzco v. King County
No. 103749-0
We are not asked whether the WPI definitions state the correct legal standard; the
parties assume they do and dispute only whether the court erred by combining those
pattern definitions. While the instruction was misleading, the employer fails to
demonstrate reversible error because it did not prejudice the employer. We reverse
and remand to the Court of Appeals for further proceedings consistent with this
decision.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
Reynaldo Verduzco has worked for King County Department of Natural
Resources and Parks (DNRP) since 1992. In 2018, he was promoted to program
manager for the DNRP hazardous waste management program. Verduzco is Latino,