Barry M. Clement v. Georgia-Pacific Corporation

46 F.3d 1139 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Barry M. CLEMENT, Plaintiff-Appellant v. GEORGIA-PACIFIC CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellee. No. 94-35027. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Jan. 10, 1995. Decided Feb. 7, 1995. 1 Before: ALARCON, BRUNETTI, Circuit Judges, and KELLEHER, * District Judge. 2 MEMORANDUM ** 3 Barry Clement appeals the district court's order granting summary judgment in favor of the defendant, Appellee Georgia-Pacific Corporation. Clement claims that the district court erred by requiring him to prove pretext, see McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792 (1973), because such is not required where the employer admits that the employment decision was based on the existence or perception of a disability. 4 Clement urges us to apply a different standard, requiring the employer accused of disability discrimination to prove the statutory defense claimed. See Wash.Rev.Code Sec. 49.60.180; Kimmel v. Crowley…