Eddie Morrison v. The Kroger Company, Inc.

MEMORANDUM

Eddie Jim Morrison appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in his diversity action alleging state law retaliation, wrongful discharge, and personal injury claims against his former employer. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo. Braunling v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc., 220 F.3d 1154, 1156 (9th Cir.2000). We affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment on Morrison’s retaliation claim under Wash. Rev.Code § 49.17.160 because the claim was time-barred. See Wash. Rev.Code § 49.17.160(2) (requiring plaintiff to file action within 30 days of a Department of Labor and Industries determination that there was no statutory violation).

The district court properly granted summary judgment on Morrison’s claim alleging wrongful discharge in violation of public policy because Morrison failed to demonstrate the lack of an adequate alternate remedy. See Cudney v. ALSCO, Inc., - Wash.App. -, 259 P.3d 244, 246-50 , 2011 WL 3849516 , at *2-6 (Wash.2011) (plaintiff could not establish requisite “jeopardy” element of wrongful discharge claim because Washington Industrial Safety and Health Act adequately protects workers who…