Wilmot v. Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Corp.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that RCW 51.48.025(2) is not the exclusive remedy available to an employee alleging wrongful discharge in retaliation for filing a workers’ compensation claim, and that such an employee may bring a wrongful discharge tort claim independent of the statute
• recognizing claim for retaliation for filing workers' compensation claim and disapproving contrary WISHA case
• recognizing claim for retaliation for filing workers’ compensation claim and disapproving contrary WISHA case
• noting that an employer could terminate an employee for failing “to observe health and safety standards” but could not terminate the employee for seeking workers’ compensation benefits based on an injury stemming from misconduct
• noting “[e]vidence of an actual pattern of retaliatory conduct is, of course, very persuasive” evidence of an employer’s improper motive
• showing needed to prove impermissible motive was a substantial factor is a lesser showing than the one needed to prove it was a but-for cause of an adverse employment action

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).