Verduzco v. King County

Summary

The Washington Supreme Court considers whether a jury instruction combining Washington Pattern Jury Instruction definitions of adverse employment action for discrimination and retaliation claims under the Washington Law Against Discrimination was misleading. The court holds that the instruction was ambiguous and potentially misleading because it did not distinguish how the two definitions applied to the separate claims. However, the court concludes that King County failed to demonstrate prejudice, reverses, and remands to the Court of Appeals for consideration of remaining appellate issues.

Holdings

1. A jury instruction that combines the pattern definitions of adverse employment action for WLAD discrimination and retaliation claims without explaining how each definition applies to each claim is ambiguous and potentially misleading.
2. The potentially misleading instruction did not constitute reversible error because King County, the challenging party, failed to demonstrate prejudice.
3. The court declined to define adverse employment action under the WLAD because the parties did not ask it to resolve that legal question.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the trial court's combined jury instruction reciting the Washington Pattern Jury Instructions' definitions of adverse employment action for discrimination and retaliation claims was misleading.
2. Whether any error in the instruction constituted reversible error when King County did not demonstrate prejudice.
3. Whether the Supreme Court should define adverse employment action under the WLAD in this case.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded