9:00 A.M. |
SEATTLE UNIVERSITY |
February 26, 2008 |
THREE CASES ONLY TWO A.M. – ONE P.M.
Case No. 1 - 79878-8
|
COUNSEL |
Sara D. Spain
v.
State of Washington, Department of Employment
Security
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
In re:
Kusum L. Batey
and
State of Washington, Employment Security
Department
and
Snohomish County Center For Battered Women
|
Marcus Lampson
Erika G.S. Uhl
Deborah Maranville
Jay Geck/Jerald Anderson |
SYNOPSIS: Employees who quit their jobs voluntarily with “good cause” are entitled to unemployment benefits. Did the legislature intend to create an exclusive list of good cause reasons to quit? If so, did the legislature create this exclusive list in a bill with an adequate bill title under article II, § 19 of the state constitution? And should this court reconsider its recent opinion in City of Fircrest v. Jensen? |
Case No. 2 - 80081-2
|
COUNSEL |
Armen Yousoufian
v.
The Office of Ron Sims, et al.
|
Michael Brannan/Rand Jack
Hon. Daniel Satterberg
Stephen Hobbs
|
SYNOPSIS: The court must decide whether the trial court abused its discretion by penalizing King County $15 per day for its noncompliance with the Public Records Act. |
1:30 P.M.
Case No. 3 - 81024-9
|
COUNSEL |
Verizon Northwest, Inc.
v.
Washington Employment Security
Department, et al.
|
Timothy O’Connell/Theresa Briscoe
Gregory Worthy/Erika G.S. Uhl/John Tirpak
|
SYNOPSIS: What is required for former employees to meet the “employer-initiated layoff” rule in WAC 192-150-100 and to qualify for unemployment benefits after they left work under a “voluntary separation program”? |
These summaries are not formulated by the Court and are provided only for the convenience of the public.
|
