Legal Opinion · Dissent

Schatz v. Department of Social & Health Services

Court of Appeals of Washington

Decided November 19, 2013No. 42332-4-IIPublished

1DissentBjorgen, J.

¶47 (dissenting in part) — Although I join in the majority’s thoughtful disposition of the other issues in this appeal, I dissent from its determination that the plaintiffs do not have an implied right of action under Washington’s comparable worth statutes and could not recover even if they had such a right. Because I believe that such an implied right of action exists, I would remand this case to allow the trial court to determine whether the case law supplies a remedy for the violation of the comparable worth statutes.

I. Analysis

A. An implied right of action exists to enforce the comparable…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Department of Ecology v. Campbell & Gwinn, L.L.C.Washington Supreme Court · 2002
  2. State, Dept. of Ecology v. Campbell & GwinnWashington Supreme Court · 2002
  3. Bennett v. HardyWashington Supreme Court · 1990
  4. Tyner v. Department of Social & Health ServicesWashington Supreme Court · 2000
  5. McNeal v. AllenWashington Supreme Court · 1980

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API