Salina

Salina v. Providence Hospice of Seattle

Good Law
226 F. App'x 653
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 8, 2007No. 05-35624California416 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM ***

Bonnie Salina appeals the district court’s grant of defendants’ motion for summary judgment on employment claims she brought under the Washington Law Against Discrimination (“WLAD”), the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), the Family Medical Leave Act (“FMLA”) and the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”). We affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment on Salina’s claim under WLAD because defendant Providence Hospice of Seattle (“Hospice”) is a nonprofit religious organization exempt from that statute’s coverage. See Rev.Code Wash. § 49.60.040(4). Hospice’s equal opportunity policy is not inconsistent with its invocation of the exemption and Salina has failed to provide material evidence that she relied upon the policy. Hospice is therefore not estopped from claiming the exemption. See Farnam v. CRISTA Ministries, 116 Wash.2d 659 , 807 P.2d 830, 840 (1991) (rejecting estoppel argument when it was “undisputed that CRISTA at all times held itself out to Farnam as a religious organization and never represented to her that it would not assert the exemption”).

Salina’s argument that she had 300 days to file her ADA charge with the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.