Legal Opinion
Jane Doe v. Boeing Company
Washington Supreme Court
Decided March 4, 1993No. 59117-2PublishedCited by 92 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtGuy, J.
Jane Doe, a biological male who was planning to have sex reassignment surgery, sought damages for employment discrimination, alleging an unaccommodated handicap under RCW 49.60, Washington's Law Against Discrimination. She 1 was discharged by the Boeing Company for wearing "excessively” feminine attire in violation of company directives. The trial court ruled in favor of Boeing on the issue of liability. The Court of Appeals reversed and entered judgment for Doe. We granted Boeing's petition for review and reverse the Court of Appeals.
Facts
Jane Doe was hired as a Boeing engineer in 1978. At…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Holland v. Boeing CompanyWashington Supreme Court · 1978
- Daniel Kimbro, Plaintiff-Appellant/cross-Appellee v. Atlantic Richfield Company, Defendant-Appellee/cross-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1989
- Phillips v. City of SeattleWashington Supreme Court · 1989
- Dean v. Municipality of Metropolitan SeattleWashington Supreme Court · 1985
- Clarke v. Shoreline School District No. 412Washington Supreme Court · 1986
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by92 opinions
- Cockle v. Dept. of Labor and IndustriesWashington Supreme Court · 2001
- Hill v. BCTI Income Fund-IWashington Supreme Court · 2001
- Collings v. Longview Fibre Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1995
- Hume v. American Disposal Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1994
- Snyder v. Medical Service Corp.Washington Supreme Court · 2001
87 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.