Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 45174-3-II Order Publishing Opinion.pdf

conducted by Cook -Gomez and Maddox. Based on Rivera' s findings, WSH concluded that the

original investigation was fair.

On January 5, 2012, Boyd received a letter from WSH' s CEO suspending him for two

weeks without pay for failing to assess a patient and for impersonating a co- worker. On January

30, 2012, WSH' s CEO issued Boyd a written reprimand for making threatening comments. The

reprimand relied on Maddox' s report. The reprimand listed Boyd' s alleged comments, including

statements about the damage a chefs knife could cause, how to burn a woman' s body so it would

be unidentifiable, the use of sniper rifles and AK -47s, and how WSH may fire him but it will

remember him. WSH forwarded the reprimand to Boyd' s new supervisor. Although other

employees participated in the conversations about guns and burning bodies, only Boyd was

disciplined.

III. PROCEDURE

On March 19, 2012, Boyd filed a complaint against WSH under the Washington Law

Against Discrimination ( WLAD), chapter 49. 60 RCW, alleging sexual harassment and retaliation.

3
Initially Rivera misspoke when he testified as to what another LRN said, but corrected himself.
This quote reflects his correction.

5
             

45174- 3- 11

CP at 1. WSH moved for summary judgment. It argued that both the sexual harassment and

retaliation claims should be dismissed. The trial court granted WSH' s motion for summary

judgment regarding the sexual harassment claim but denied the motion regarding the retaliation

claim.

The case proceeded to jury trial and at the close of Boyd' s case, WSH moved for judgment

as a matter of law under CR 50. It argued that four of the bases for adverse employment actions —