Hedenburg v. Aramark American Food Services, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that plaintiff was not performing satisfactory work 8 where “the record reveals that she violated numerous [employer] policies”
• “Hedenburg has simply not provided 9 any evidence showing a retaliatory motive on the part of Aramark.”
• “In interpreting the WLAD, Washington courts rely upon cases 20 interpreting Title VII.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).