Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 341038_pub.pdf
- Citation
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 341038_pub.pdf
- Jurisdiction
- Washington (state)
- Source verification
- official_capture_completeness_unverified
- Original Source
- https://www.courts.wa.gov/opinions/pdf/341038_pub.pdf ↗
Related Parts of This Source
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 341038_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 341038_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 341038_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 341038_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 341038_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 341038_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 341038_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 341038_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 341038_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 341038_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 341038_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 341038_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 341038_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 341038_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 341038_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 341038_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 341038_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 341038_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 341038_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 341038_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 341038_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 341038_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 341038_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 341038_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 341038_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 341038_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 341038_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 341038_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 341038_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 341038_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 341038_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 341038_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 341038_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 341038_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 341038_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 341038_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 341038_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 341038_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 341038_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 341038_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 341038_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 341038_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 341038_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 341038_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 341038_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 341038_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 341038_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 341038_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 341038_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 341038_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 341038_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 341038_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 341038_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 341038_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 341038_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 341038_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 341038_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 341038_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 341038_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 341038_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 341038_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 341038_pub.pdf
Full Text
1,794 charslawful and reasonable directive to attend a meeting may constitute insubordination. Custom Hardware Engineering & Consulting, Inc. v. Dowell, 919 F. Supp. 2d 1018, 1034-35 (E.D. Mo. 2013). One Washington decision recognizes that insubordination, in the form of failing to submit to a physical examination, constitutes justifiable cause to fire an employee, despite a claim of employment discrimination. Brownfield v. City of 42 For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/. No. 34103-8-III Martin v. Gonzaga University Yakima, 178 Wn. App. at 873-75 (2013). Henry H. Perritt, Jr., identifies the fourth element of the public policy tort as the lack of an "overriding legitimate business justification." Henry H. Perritt, Jr. The Future of Wrongful Dismissal Claims: Where Does Employer Self Interest Lie?, 58 U. CIN. L. REV. 397, 399 (1989) (emphasis added). Ohio decisions also insert the word "business" when expressing the element. Jaber v. FirstMerit Corp., 2017-0hio-277, _ N.E.3d _,(Ct.App.); Vitatoe v. Lawrence Industries, Inc., 153 Ohio App. 3d 609, 795 N.E.2d 125, 132-33 (2003); Wiegerig v. Timken Co., 144 Ohio App. 3d 664, 761 N.E.2d 118, 125 (2001). Washington's statement of the rule does not incorporate the expression "business." Gardner v. Loomis Armored, Inc., 128 Wn.2d 931 ( 1996); Rickman v. Premera Blue Cross, 184 Wn.2d 300 (2015); Rose v. Anderson Hay & Grain Co., 184 Wn.2d 268 (2015); Becker v. Community Health Systems, Inc., 184 Wn.2d 252 (2015). One might argue that, because of the omission of the term "business," Washington law requires the employer to advance a societal or public interest rationalization, rather than a selfish economic reason, to satisfy the final element of overriding justification. We