Antonius v. King County, 153 Wash. 2d 256

Summary

The Washington Supreme Court held that the U.S. Supreme Court's analysis in National Railroad Passenger Corp. v. Morgan applies to hostile work environment claims under Washington's Law Against Discrimination. A hostile work environment claim is treated as a unified unlawful employment practice, so acts outside the three-year limitations period may be considered if at least one related act occurred within that period. The court affirmed reversal of partial summary judgment for King County and remanded for application of the Morgan standard.

Holdings

1. Washington adopts the Morgan analysis for determining whether a hostile work environment claim is timely under the Washington Law Against Discrimination. A hostile work environment claim is treated as one unlawful employment practice composed of a series of related acts, rather than as separate acts subject to a continuing-violation exception.
2. Earlier acts may be considered as part of a hostile work environment claim if they are part of the same actionable hostile work environment practice and at least one contributing act occurred within the statutory limitations period.
3. Washington declines to adopt a discovery rule of accrual for hostile work environment claims under the Washington Law Against Discrimination.
4. A gap in alleged discriminatory conduct does not, by itself, prevent acts before and after the gap from constituting one hostile work environment under Morgan.
5. The trial court improperly granted partial summary judgment because it applied the continuing-violation doctrine rather than Morgan; the case must be remanded for proceedings under the correct standard.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Washington should adopt the United States Supreme Court's Morgan analysis for determining the timeliness of hostile work environment claims under the Washington Law Against Discrimination.
2. Whether a hostile work environment claim is timely as to earlier acts when at least one act contributing to the same hostile work environment occurred within the three-year limitations period.
3. Whether Washington recognizes a discovery rule of accrual for hostile work environment claims under the Washington Law Against Discrimination.
4. Whether a gap in alleged discriminatory conduct, including Antonius's transfer to an all-female facility, necessarily prevents earlier and later acts from being part of the same hostile work environment.
5. Whether the trial court properly granted partial summary judgment after applying the continuing-violation framework.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded