Schatz v. Department of Social & Health Services
Court of Appeals of Washington
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
- Department of Ecology v. Campbell & Gwinn, L.L.C.Washington Supreme Court · 2002
- State, Dept. of Ecology v. Campbell & GwinnWashington Supreme Court · 2002
- Bennett v. HardyWashington Supreme Court · 1990
- Tyner v. Department of Social & Health ServicesWashington Supreme Court · 2000
- McNeal v. AllenWashington Supreme Court · 1980
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.