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

Full Text

1,715 chars

306 (2008) (equal protection); TS. v. Boy Scouts ofAmerica, 157 Wn.2d 416,425, 138

P.3d 1053 (2006) (First Amendment associational rights); Roth v. Veteran's

Administration of Government of United States, 856 F.2d 1401, 1407 (9th Cir. 1988)

(public employee's right to free speech). We doubt the ability of a jury oflaypeople to

balance legal polices with private interests. In Gardner v. Loomis Armored, Inc., 128

Wn.2d 931 (1996), the Supreme Court conducted its own weighing of the public policy

furthered by the employee's conduct and the employer's interests. The court held,

presumably as a matter oflaw, that the policy of saving another's life superseded the

employer's policy of employee safety.

50
For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.

No. 34103-8-III
Martin v. Gonzaga University

We observe that, assuming the fulfillment of the overriding justification element is

for the court, the court may still need to conduct a factual hearing before completing its

decision. Nevertheless, we need not resolve whether the court should solely analyze the

overriding justification element in all cases and whether a factual hearing is desired for

this appeal. We withhold from trial the weighing of the public and employer interests in

this appeal because of the unchallenged evidence of noteworthy insubordination by David

Martin.

We have several times previously answered the eighth and final question of

whether David Martin presents sufficient evidence to defeat Gonzaga University's

summary judgment motion. Our conclusion that the overriding justification need not

have motivated the employer when terminating the employee simplifies answering this