Washington State

Office of the Attorney General

Attorney General

Bob Ferguson

Cases

Federal Policies

  • Washington, et al. v. Trump et al. (“Travel Ban”) -  complaint against EO1, complaint against EO2, complaint against EO3 
    • Washington lead a six-state challenge to a series of policies banning immigration and travel to the United States from Muslim-majority countries. The travel bans separated families, harmed employers including state agencies, harmed the interests of state colleges and universities, and caused other harm to the states of Washington, California, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York, and Oregon. Washington obtained the first injunction against the original travel ban, and lead litigation against subsequent versions of the travel ban issued by President Trump. The travel bans were revoked on January 20, 2021, by Presidential Proclamation 10141 titled, “Ending Discriminatory Bans on Entry to the United States,” and the states’ litigation is no longer pending.
  • New York, et al. v. Biden, et al. (“DACA”) - complaint, U.S. Supreme Court opinion 
    • The State of Washington, along with New York and Massachusetts, co-leads a 17-state challenge to the federal government’s termination of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program (“DACA”). Since it first established in 2012, DACA has granted lawful presence to close to 800,000 immigrants who were brought to the United States as children. On X, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed with Washington that federal agencies and officials violated the Administrative Procedure Act when they attempted to terminate DACA. Litigation regarding the future of the program is pending in federal court in Brooklyn, New York. 
  • Karnoski, et al. v. Trump, et al. (“Transgender Military Service Ban”) - complaint
    • The State of Washington successfully intervened in a challenge to President Trump’s ban on transgender individuals serving in the military, including the Administration’s policies related to recruitment, retention, and the provision of health-care services for transgender service members. Washington is home to approximately 60,000 active, reserve, and National Guard members. The complaint alleges that the Transgender Military Service Ban violates the constitutional guarantees of Equal Protection and Due Process by discriminating on the bases of sex and gender identity. The lawsuit is pending in federal court in Seattle. The Transgender Military Service Ban was revoked on January 25, 2021, by Executive Order 14004, and the Department of Defense subsequently issued standards for open military service by transgender service members. Litigation is no longer pending.
  • Washington, et al. v. United States, et al. (“Family Separation”) — complaint
    • The State of Washington lead 17 states and the District of Columbia in challenging the Trump Administration’s policies of refusing to accept asylum applications and forcibly separating families arriving together at the southwestern border. The complaint alleges that the federal government, its agencies, and officials violate the Constitution, Administrative Procedure Act, and federal asylum law by refusing asylum applications and separating parents from their children. On January 21, 2021, the Acting Attorney General rescinded the “zero tolerance” policy under which family separation had been justified and promoted. Litigation is no longer pending.
  • California, et al. v. McAleenan, et al. (“Child Detention Conditions”) — complaint
    • The State of Washington joins 18 states and the District of Columbia in challenging the federal government’s rulemaking attempt to remove protections that prevent the mistreatment of immigrant children and families who arrive at the U.S. border, and to allow for their indefinite detention in federal facilities without adequate standards of care or state oversight. The lawsuit, which is pending in federal court in Los Angeles, alleges violations of the U.S. Constitution, Administrative Procedure Act, and argues that the proposed rule exceeds the authority of the agencies that adopted it.
  • Washington v. U.S. Dep’t of Homeland Security, et al. (“Courthouse Arrests”) – complaint
    • The State of Washington challenges the policy of federal immigration authorities to coopt Washington State courthouses to carry out civil immigration arrests. The federal courthouse arrest policy deters parties, victims, and witnesses from appearing in court, hampers prosecutions, and undermines public safety and trust in state courts. The complaint alleges that the courthouse arrest policy violates the Tenth Amendment and constitutional guarantee of access to courts, and violates the federal Administrative Procedure Act in several ways. The case is pending in federal court in Seattle.

Employment

  • State v. O’Reilly Auto Enterprises, LLC (King County Superior Court) – complaint
    • The State of Washington alleges that an auto parts retailer violated the Washington Law Against Discrimination and the Healthy Starts Act by discriminating against pregnant employees and denying them reasonable workplace accommodations to which they are entitled by law. O’Reilly’s also retaliated against pregnant employees who sought pregnancy accommodations. The State further alleges that O’Reilly’s communications to job seekers were unfair or deceptive in violation of the Consumer Protection Act. 
  • Washington v. Colmar, Inc., et al. (Pierce County Superior Court) – complaint, court decision
    • The State of Washington alleged that two related subcontractors of FedEx and their officers violated Washington’s Healthy Starts Act and the Washington Law Against Discrimination when they failed to accommodate and then terminated a pregnant employee because of her pregnancy-related lifting limitation. The Court found the individual and corporate defendants to be liable for their discriminatory acts, and after a two-day trial, ordered Colmar to pay $41,672.36 in back wages and damages to the fired employee and train employees and supervisors on workers’ rights under Washington law.
  • Washington v. Matheson Flight Extenders, Inc. (King County Superior Court and Western District of Washington) – complaint, agreed order
    • The State of Washington alleged that a freight terminal handling services company located near SeaTac Airport violated the Washington Law Against Discrimination when it failed to accommodate and then terminated a pregnant employee who requested modified duty, while accommodating others with disabilities resulting from workplace injuries. The State further alleged that Matheson failed to provide reasonable accommodations for its employees with injuries or disabling conditions that do not result from a workplace injury. The agreed order resolving the case requires Matheson to offer the same light duty opportunities or accommodations to pregnant employees or employees whose disability is not the result of a workplace injury as to employees injured on-the-job. Matheson further agreed to pay the State $168,500, which the State distributed to current and former Matheson employees who had been harmed by Matheson’s actions.
  • State v. The GEO Group, Inc. (Pierce County Superior Court and Western District of Washington) - complaint, judgment
    • The State of Washington sued The GEO Group, Inc. for failing to pay adequate wages to immigrant detainees, who are held at the Northwest ICE Processing Center (previously known as the Northwest Detention Center) in Tacoma. A unanimous federal jury agreed and the court issued an injunction, requiring GEO to comply with Washington’s minimum wage law. The court also determined that GEO is liable for unjust enrichment for its practice of paying immigrant detainees $1 per day for work that they perform to keep the facility operational.
  • State v. Horning Brothers, L.L.C. (U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Washington) — complaint, consent decree
    • The State of Washington alleged that a Quincy agricultural company and its packing shed foreman violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Washington Law Against Discrimination by using sex-segregated hiring practices in its onion packing shed, and by subjecting women who worked in the packing shed to severe and pervasive sexual harassment, as well as retaliation when the complained or rejected the foreman’s advances. The consent decree permanently enjoins the foreman from serving in a supervisor role at the company, requires the company to adopt a non-discrimination policy and receive training, mandates new complaint and investigative procedures, and requires recordkeeping and monitoring by the Attorney General’s Office. The company must pay $525,000 in damages, attorney’s fees, and costs. 
  • State v. Electroimpact (Snohomish County Superior Court) – complaint, consent decree
    • The State of Washington alleged an aerospace automation company violated the Washington Law Against Discrimination and the Consumer Protection Act, by refusing to hire Muslim applicants, engaging in religious and/or national origin harassment, discriminating against employees based on marital status, and retaliating against employees who opposed such unfair practices. The consent decree requires Electroimpact to cross-post job advertisements with minority engineering organizations, host minority recruitment events, and eliminate its policy of basing compensation decisions based on a change in marital status. Further, Electroimpact is required to pay $485,000 for damages, restitution, as well as attorneys’ fees and costs.
  • State v. Masingale (Spokane County Superior Court) – complaint, consent decree
    • The State of Washington alleged that Flag Hill Lumber Co. Inc., Greenacres Motors, LLC, and Monte Masingale, employers and car dealers in Spokane and Post Falls, Idaho, were liable for a pattern of sexual harassment and discrimination against employees and prospective employees in violation of the Washington Law Against Discrimination and the Consumer Protection Act. The corporate defendants conceded liability. The consent decree requires the two corporate defendants to adopt a non-discrimination policy, train employees, report any complaints, and pay $280,000 in damages, civil penalties, and attorneys’ fees and costs.
       
  • State v. Valley Fruit Orchards, LLC (Yakima County Superior Court) – assurance of discontinuance
    • The State of Washington accepted an assurance of discontinuance following its investigation of allegations of sexual harassment and retaliation at Valley Fruit Orchards, a fruit farming and shipping company based in Wapato. The assurance of discontinuance requires Valley Fruit to adopt a revised nondiscrimination policy, train all employees on non-discrimination requirements in employment, include the non-discrimination policy in employment packets distributed to seasonal and non-seasonal employees, and maintain a human resources hotline that employees may call to make a complaint about discrimination or harassment at work.
  • State of Washington v. Great Columbia Berry Farms, LLC, (Walla Walla County Superior Court) – complaint, consent decree
    • The State of Washington alleged that a blueberry grower in Walla Walla County violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Washington Law Against Discrimination by subjecting—through its manager/supervisor—women who worked at the blueberry farm to severe, pervasive, and unwelcome sexual harassment. The State also alleged the blueberry grower retaliated against the women when they rejected or complained about the manager/supervisor’s advances. The consent decree permanently enjoins the company from rehiring the manager/supervisor in any capacity or entering the blueberry farm’s premises, requires the company to adopt a non-discrimination policy, provide trainings, implement revised complaint procedures, institute investigative procedures to ensure proper investigations of complaints of discrimination, and requires recordkeeping and monitoring by the Attorney General’s Office. The company must pay $350,000 which will be used to compensate the women harmed by the supervisor/manager and the company.
  • State v. Ostrom Mushroom Farms, LLC, et al. (Yakima County Superior Court) – amended complaint, consent decree, assurance of discontinuance
    • The State of Washington alleged that Ostrom Mushroom Farms and its parent company Asellus-Sunnyside, LLC, engaged in unfair, deceptive, discriminatory, and retaliatory practices at its mushroom-growing facility in Sunnyside by intentionally displacing domestic farmworkers and female farmworkers with foreign, male workers through the H-2A Temporary Agricultural Worker Program, imposing discriminatory employment conditions on domestic workers, misrepresenting job eligibility requirements, wages, and job availability to domestic workers, and retaliating against domestic workers who asserted their rights. In February 2023, Ostrom and Asellus-Sunnyside sold their facility to Greenwood Mushrooms, LLC, (doing business as Windmill Farms). The Consent Decree requires Ostrom and Asellus to pay $3.4 million to compensate workers who were harmed by their illegal employment practices. An accompanying Assurance of Discontinuance enjoins Windmill Farms from engaging in Ostrom’s discriminatory practices, and requires the company to update its discrimination policies and provide training.
  • State v. Wonolo, Inc. (King County Superior Court) – complaint, consent decree
    • The State of Washington alleged that a temporary staffing agency violated the Fair Chance Act, RCW 49.94, by using a job application process that required a criminal background check before initially determining applicants were qualified for work, advertising employment opportunities in a way that excludes people with criminal records from applying, and automatically excluding individuals with a criminal records from consideration for jobs. The Consent Decree requires Wonolo to make changes to its mobile application, provide notice to Washington applicants and employers about the law, comply with recordkeeping and reporting requirements, and reimburse the State for the costs of its investigation and enforcement action.
  •  State v. Tradesmen International, LLC (Pierce County Superior Court) – complaint, consent decree
    • The State of Washington alleged that a temporary staffing agency violated the Consumer Protection Act and Washington’s noncompetition statute by entering into noncompetition agreements with employers that contracted with the staffing agency for temporary workers. The State alleged that those noncompetition agreements restricted the job mobility of working-wage Tradesmen employees, and deceived workers about the existence of the noncompetition agreements. The Consent Decree requires Tradesmen to terminate its use of noncompetition agreements for working-wage employees, provide notice to its employees about the law, comply with recordkeeping and reporting requirements, and pay restitution to impacted employees.
  • State v. Operation Veterans Assistance & Humanitarian Aid, et al. (Chelan County Superior Court) - complaint
    • The State of Washington alleges that a Wenatchee nonprofit and its CEO violated the Washington Law Against Discrimination by subjecting—through its CEO—employees, volunteers, and patrons of the nonprofit’s thrift stores to severe, pervasive, and unwelcome sexual harassment, including unwanted touching, making sexually explicit comments, propositioning them for sex, and asking them to expose their bodies to him. The State also alleges that the non-profit retaliated against women who rejected and/or complained about the CEO’s inappropriate sexual conduct.

Housing

  • State v. Marble Community Landowners Association, et al. (Stevens County Superior Court) - assurance of discontinuance 
    • The State of Washington accepted an assurance of discontinuance following its investigation of allegations that a landowners association and its directing agents coerced landowners into recording restrictive covenants against their properties that expressed religious preferences and interfered with real estate sales to enforce the restrictive covenants. The assurance of discontinuance requires the landowners association to adopt new Bylaws that remove the religious restrictions on real estate ownership and transfer, ensures that all landowners may become members of the landowners association and have access to residential services on a non-discriminatory basis, and provides for the State to monitor compliance.
  • State v. Celski & Associates, Inc. (Benton County Superior Court) – assurance of discontinuance
    • The State of Washington accepted an assurance of discontinuance from Celski & Associates, Inc., a housing provider in Kennewick. Celski & Associates has agreed not to discriminate against veterans or people with disabilities by refusing to accept housing vouchers provided through the federal HUD-Veterans Administrative Supportive Housing (VASH) program. Such conduct would violate the federal Fair Housing Act, the Washington Law Against Discrimination, and the Consumer Protection Act. Celski & Associates also agrees to adopt a revised non-discrimination policy, train its staff, and pay $5,000 for recovery of the State’s costs and fees.
       
  • State v. Country Homes Realty L.L C (Spokane County Superior Court) – assurance of discontinuance
    • The State of Washington accepted an assurance of discontinuance from Country Homes Realty L.L C d/b/a Country Homes Sales & Property Management, a housing provider in Spokane. Country Homes Realty has agreed not to discriminate against veterans or people with disabilities by refusing to accept housing vouchers provided through the federal HUD-Veterans Administrative Supportive Housing (VASH) program. Such conduct would violate the federal Fair Housing Act, the Washington Law Against Discrimination, and the Consumer Protection Act. Country Homes Realty also agrees to adopt a revised non-discrimination policy, train its staff, and pay $5,000 for recovery of the State’s costs and fees.
       
  • State v. Domus Urbis, LLC (Spokane County Superior Court) – consent decree
    • The State of Washington accepted a consent decree from Domus Urbis, LLC, a housing provider in Spokane. Domus Urbis, LLC has agreed not to discriminate against veterans or people with disabilities by refusing to accept housing vouchers provided through the federal HUD-Veterans Administrative Supportive Housing (VASH) program. Such conduct would violate the federal Fair Housing Act, the Washington Law Against Discrimination, and the Consumer Protection Act. Domus Urbis also agrees to adopt a revised non-discrimination policy, train its staff, and pay $5,500 for recovery of the State’s costs and fees.
       
  • State v. Rowley Properties, Inc. (King County Superior Court) – assurance of discontinuance
    • The State of Washington accepted an assurance of discontinuance from Rowley Properties, Inc., a housing provider in Issaquah. Rowley Properties has agreed not to discriminate against veterans or people with disabilities by refusing to accept housing vouchers provided through the federal HUD-Veterans Administrative Supportive Housing (VASH) program. Such conduct would violate the federal Fair Housing Act, the Washington Law Against Discrimination, and the Consumer Protection Act. Rowley Properties also agrees to adopt a revised non-discrimination policy, train its staff, and pay $6,000 for recovery of the State’s costs and fees.
       
  • State v. TJ Cline, L.L.C. (Walla Walla County Superior Court) – consent decree
    • The State of Washington accepted a consent decree from TJ Cline, L.L.C., a housing provider in Walla Walla. TJ Cline has agreed not to discriminate against veterans or people with disabilities by refusing to accept housing vouchers provided through the federal HUD-Veterans Administrative Supportive Housing (VASH) program. Such conduct would violate the federal Fair Housing Act, the Washington Law Against Discrimination, and the Consumer Protection Act. TJ Cline also agrees to adopt a revised non-discrimination policy, train its staff, and pay $5,000 for recovery of the State’s costs and fees.
       
  • State v. Welcome Home Properties, LLC (Walla Walla County Superior Court) – consent decree
    • The State of Washington accepted a consent decree from Welcome Home Properties, LLC, a housing provider in Walla Walla. Welcome Home Properties has agreed not to discriminate against veterans or people with disabilities by refusing to accept housing vouchers provided through the federal HUD-Veterans Administrative Supportive Housing (VASH) program. Such conduct would violate the federal Fair Housing Act, the Washington Law Against Discrimination, and the Consumer Protection Act. Welcome Home Properties also agrees to adopt a revised non-discrimination policy, train its staff, and pay $5,000 for recovery of the State’s costs and fees.
       
  • State v. Yelm Creek Apartments, LLC (Thurston County Superior Court) – consent decree
    • The State of Washington accepted a consent decree from Yelm Creek Apartments, LLC, a housing provider in Yelm. Yelm Creek Apartments, LLC has agreed not to discriminate against veterans or people with disabilities by refusing to accept housing vouchers provided through the federal HUD-Veterans Administrative Supportive Housing (VASH) program. Such conduct would violate the federal Fair Housing Act, the Washington Law Against Discrimination, and the Consumer Protection Act. Yelm Creek Apartments, LLC also agrees to adopt a revised non-discrimination policy, train its staff, and pay $6,000 for recovery of the State’s costs and fees.
       
  • State v. Coho Real Estate Group, LLC (King County Superior Court) – complaint, consent decree
    • The State of Washington alleged Coho Real Estate Group, LLC (“Coho”) a King County housing provider, advertised and applied a blanket prohibition on any person with a felony conviction that violated the Washington Law Against Discrimination, the federal Fair Housing Act, and the Washington Consumer Protection Act. The consent decree requires Coho to pay civil penalties and train staff on the unlawful and discriminatory impacts of criminal background checks.
       
  • State v. Dobler Management Company, Inc. (Pierce County Superior Court) – complaint, consent decree
    • The State of Washington alleged Dobler Management Company, Inc. (“DMCI”) a Pierce County housing provider, advertised and applied a blanket prohibition on any person with a felony conviction that violated the Washington Law Against Discrimination, the federal Fair Housing Act, and the Washington Consumer Protection Act. The consent decree requires DMCI to pay civil penalties and train staff on the unlawful and discriminatory impacts of criminal background checks.
       
  • State v. DSB Investments (King County Superior Court) – assurance of discontinuance
    • The State of Washington accepted an assurance of discontinuance following its investigation of allegations that its application of its towing and repair policies discriminated against African American tenants. The assurance of discontinuance requires DSB Investments to adopt a non-discrimination policy, undergo fair housing training, pay restitution to tenants, and pay attorney’ fees and costs.
       
  • State v. KPS Realty, LLC (Spokane County Superior Court) – assurance of discontinuance
    • The State of Washington accepted an assurance of discontinuance from KPS Realty, LLC d/b/a KPS Property Management, a housing provider in Spokane. KPS Realty has agreed not to discriminate against veterans or people with disabilities by refusing to accept housing vouchers provided through the federal HUD-Veterans Administrative Supportive Housing (VASH) program. Such conduct would violate the federal Fair Housing Act, the Washington Law Against Discrimination, and the Consumer Protection Act. KPS Realty also agrees to adopt a revised non-discrimination policy, train its staff, and pay $5,500 for recovery of the State’s costs and fees.
       
  • State v. Pacific Crest, LLC (King County Superior Court) – complaint, consent decree
    • The State of Washington alleged Pacific Crest Real Estate, LLC, a King County housing provider, advertised and applied a blanket prohibition on any person with a felony conviction that violated the Washington Law Against Discrimination, the federal Fair Housing Act, and the Washington Consumer Protection Act. The consent decree requires Pacific Crest to pay civil penalties and train staff on the unlawful and discriminatory impacts of criminal background checks.
       
  • State v. Premier Residential (King County Superior Court) – complaint, consent decree
    • The State of Washington alleged Premier Residential, a King County housing provider, advertised and applied a blanket prohibition on any person with a felony conviction that violated the Washington Law Against Discrimination, the federal Fair Housing Act, and the Washington Consumer Protection Act.The consent decree requires Premier Residential to pay civil penalties and train staff on the unlawful and discriminatory impacts of criminal background checks.
  • State v. Realty Mart Property Management, LLC (Spokane County Superior Court) complaint, consent decree
    • The State of Washington alleged Realty Mart Property Management, LLC, and its managing agent John Cornett, discriminated on the basis of disability in violation of the federal Fair Housing Act, the Washington Law Against Discrimination, and the Consumer Protection Act by charging a double damage deposit to prospective tenants who pay rent with disability income. The consent decree requires the defendants to adopt a revised non-discrimination policy, train staff, pay a civil penalty, and pay the State’s costs and fees.
  • State v. Weidner Property Management LLC (King County Superior Court) – assurance of discontinuance
    • The State of Washington has accepted an assurance of discontinuance from Weidner Property Management LLC, a national housing provider. Weidner has agreed not to advertise or apply a blanket prohibition on any person with a felony conviction that would violate the Washington Law Against Discrimination, the federal Fair Housing Act, and the Washington Consumer Protection Act. Weidner also agrees to pay the State of Washington $6,000 for recovery of its fees and costs and train staff on the unlawful and discriminatory impacts of criminal background checks.
  • State v. JRK Residential Group, Inc. (Pierce County Superior Court) – complaint, consent decree 
    • The State of Washington alleged that JRK Residential Group, Inc., a property management company with apartment complexes and townhomes in Tacoma, Silverdale, and Marysville, violated the Governor’s Moratorium on Evictions (Emergency Proclamation 20-19) by issuing Fourteen-Day Notices to Pay or Vacate to tenants who were behind on rent for April 2020 at one of its properties. The State also alleged that JRK violated the Consumer Protection Act by engaging in unfair and deceptive acts and practices to collect April 2020 rent during a public health emergency, including harassing and threatening phone calls, emails, and letters, while failing to reference the Governor’s Proclamation or its protections. The consent decree prohibits JRK from issuing unlawful eviction notices or harassing communications to tenants during the Moratorium on Evictions, and it requires that JRK forgive April 2020 rent for residents who received the Notices to Pay or Vacate, waive lease termination fees for any resident needing or choosing to move out of during the Moratorium, and pay almost $250,000 to tenants who received unfair, deceptive, or harassing communications from JRK.
  • State v. Whitewater Creek, Inc., et al. (Spokane County Superior Court) – complaint, consent decree
    • The State of Washington alleged that Whitewater Creek, Inc. and related companies, which own and manage approximately 1,000 low-income housing units in Spokane County, Washington, violated the Governor’s Moratorium on Evictions (Emergency Proclamation 20-19.1) by threatening to evict tenants in April 2020 for unpaid rent and fees. The State also alleged that the Whitewater Creek entities violated the Consumer Protection Act by engaging in unfair and deceptive acts and practices to pressure low-income residents to submit unpaid rent during a public health emergency, while failing to reference the Governor’s Proclamation or its protections. The consent decree prohibits Whitewater Creek from threatening to evict residents for non-payment of rent, or refusing to entering into reasonable repayment plans with residents, during the Moratorium on Evictions, and requires Whitewater Creek to pay $50,000.
  • State v. Alpha Omicron Pi Fraternity, Inc., et al. (King County Superior Court) – complaint, consent decree
    • The State of Washington alleged Alpha Omicron Pi and its related companies, which operated a sorority house on the University of Washington’s “Greek Row,” violated the Governor’s Moratorium on Evictions (Emergency Proclamations 20.19.1 – 20-19.5) by charging students housing-related fees despite the house being closed due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The State also alleged that Alpha Omicron Pi violated the Washington Consumer Protection Act by assessing late fees it knew to be prohibited by the Moratorium and threatening members with loss of membership and referral to debt collectors if they did not pay. The consent decree requires Alpha Omicron Pi to pay $253,600 to compensate members who were charged the improper fees. The sorority house closed in February 2021.

Public Accommodations

  •  Olympus Spa, et al. v. Human Rights Commission, et al. (Western District of Washington) – order dismissing case
    • Plaintiff Olympus Spa denies services to transgender women under a “biological women only” policy. The Spa sued HRC and one of its investigators alleging that their enforcement of the WLAD’s prohibition of discrimination based on gender identity in places of public accommodation violates the Spa’s First Amendment rights of freedom of religion, speech, and association, as well as its Fourteenth Amendment right to due process and religious freedom guaranteed by the Washington State Constitution. The district court granted Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss and the Spa has appealed.
  • Washington v. Motel 6 Operating L.P. (King County Superior Court) – complaint, consent decree
    • The State of Washington alleged that Motel 6 violated the Consumer Protection Act and the Washington Law Against Discrimination by providing motel guest registry lists upon request to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents without a warrant or any showing of probable cause or reasonable suspicion. The State alleged that Motel 6’s actions violate guests’ right to privacy and are discriminatory because Motel 6 knew the guest lists would be used to target guests on the basis of their national origin. The consent decree prohibits Motel 6 from disclosing guest information without a warrant or other lawful basis at all locations nationwide. The company must provide training for its employees to ensure they do not release guests’ private information unlawfully. Motel 6 must pay $12 million to be used for restitution to individuals harmed by Motel 6’s unlawful disclosures, as well as attorney’s fees and costs.
  • State v. Zein Automobiles (Snohomish County Superior Court) – complaint, consent decree
    • The State of Washington alleged a used car dealership, Zein Automobiles, violated the Washington Law Against Discrimination and the Consumer Protection Act, by failing to honor advertised six-month warranties and targeting Spanish-speaking consumers yet failing to provide material written disclosures in Spanish. The consent decree requires Zein Automobiles disclose all material information in Spanish when the sale is conducted in Spanish. Further, Zein Automobiles is required to pay $250,000 for consumer restitution, attorneys’ fees and costs, and/or cy pres.
  • State v. Greyhound Lines, Inc. (Spokane County Superior Court) – complaint, consent decree
    • The State of Washington alleged that Greyhound Lines, Inc. violated the Consumer Protection Act and the Washington Law Against Discrimination by allowing U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agents to board Greyhound buses and access non-public space at the Spokane Intermodal Center to conduct warrantless and suspicionless immigration enforcement sweeps, failing to warn its customers this was occurring, misrepresenting its role in allowing the sweeps to occur, and doing so despite knowing that CBP targets individuals based on their race, skin color, or national origin. The consent decree requires Greyhound to end these practices, notify its customers of the risks of warrantless and suspicionless searches, implement a complaint procedure for passengers, and pay $2.2 million to provide restitution to those harmed by Greyhound’s conduct.

Insurance

  • State v. AGA Service Company, et al. (d/b/a Allianz) (King County Superior Court) – amended complaint, consent decree
    • The State of Washington alleged that travel insurance company Allianz discriminates against Washingtonians with disabilities by selling travel insurance policies that contain a coverage exclusion for trip interruptions and cancellations caused by mental health-related events. The State further alleged that Allianz discriminated against hundreds of Washingtonians by denying travel claims based on the presence of a mental health condition, ranging from anxiety to Alzheimer’s disease. The consent decree prohibits Allianz from selling travel insurance policies with the discriminatory exclusion in Washington or from denying travel claims based on the presence of a mental health condition. Allianz must also pay $1.5 million to be used for restitution to individuals harmed by Allianz’s discriminatory policy, as well as attorneys’ fees and costs.

Police Practices

  • State v. City of Sunnyside, et al. (U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Washington) — amended complaint
    • The State of Washington alleges that the City of Sunnyside and five individual city officials operate an unlawful policy and practice of evicting residents without due process pursuant to the City of Sunnyside’s Crime Free Rental Housing Program. Under the program, police evict tenants suspected of engaging in or permitting crime to occur at their home. These evictions occur whether or not anyone was arrested or charged with a crime, and without the notice and due prsocess prerequisites for eviction under Washington’s landlord-tenant law. The State alleges that these police practices fall more heavily on residents who are Latinx, women, and families with children. The complaint alleges violations of the federal and state constitutions, federal and state fair housing laws, and the Washington Residential Landlord Tenant Act.

Enforcement Actions on Behalf of Washington State Human Rights Commission (WSHRC)

  • WSHRC v. Robert and Francine Saraceno, et al. (Spokane County Superior Court) – complaint
    • The WSHRC alleges that Robert and Francine Saraceno unlawfully discriminated against their tenants on the basis of sex when Robert Saraceno sexually harassed and assaulted female tenants at multiple rental properties owned by the Saracenos in the Spokane area, and retaliated against tenants who opposed his illegal conduct. The WSHRC also alleged that Francine Saraceno aided and abetted Robert Saraceno where she knew or had reason to know about his harassment, but did nothing to stop it. The case proceeded to a bench trial in December 2023. The parties are currently awaiting the Court’s decision.  
  • WSHRC v. Benjamin A. Thomas, Jr. et. al., (Office of Administrative Hearings) – second amended complaint, consent decree
    • The WSHRC alleged that Benjamin Thomas subjected a multi-racial family to unequal treatment, racial harassment, discriminatory statements, and retaliation based on race. The Consent Decree prohibits the unlawful practices and requires Thomas to pay general damages to the aggrieved family and undergo fair housing training.
  • WSHRC v. Spike’s Food-Mart Inc. (Office of Administrative Hearings) – complaint, consent decree
    • The WSHRC alleged Spike’s Food-Mart Inc., a gift shop and deli in Ritzville, demoted and terminated an employee because of behavior caused by her disability. The Consent Decree requires Spike’s Food-Mart to pay general damages and undergo equal opportunity employment training for managers and supervisors, with an emphasis on preventing discrimination on the basis of disability.
  • WSHRC v. Agri-Pack, L.L.C. (Office of Administrative Hearings) – complaint, consent decree
    • The WSHRC alleged Agri-Pack, L.L.C., a vegetable packing facility in Pasco, harassed a transgender employee, and refused to rehire her following a seasonal layoff, based on her gender identity. The Consent Decree requires Agri-Pack to pay general damages and back pay, and undergo equal opportunity employment training for managers and floor supervisors, with an emphasis on preventing discrimination on the basis of sex, gender identity, and sexual orientation.
       
  • WSHRC v. Haney Truck Line, LLC (Office of Administrative Hearings) – complaint, Administrative Law Judge Final Order
    • The WSHRC alleged Haney Truck Line, LLC, a shipping company based in Yakima, discriminated against an employee with a disability by failing to reasonably accommodate her and by prohibiting her from using her medical-alert service animal. The Administrative Law Judge, after a three day trial, found in favor of the WSHRC and ordered Haney Truck Line to pay the maximum amount allowed by statute for humiliation and mental suffering caused by the company’s arbitrary denial of the service animal. Haney Truck Line was also ordered to pay the employee’s out-of-pocket expenses and undergo equal opportunity employment training for all management employees, with an emphasis on reasonable accommodation and service animals.
  • WSHRC v. Linda Haring (Clark County Superior Court) – Complaint, Consent Decree
    • The WSHRC alleged Linda Haring discriminated against her tenants, a family of five, when she refused to reasonably accommodate one member of the family with a disability, instead terminating the family’s tenancy. The Consent Decree requires Ms. Haring to pay general damages, implement a non-discrimination and reasonable accommodation policy compliant with state and federal fair housing laws, and undergo fair housing training.
  • WSHRC v. Thomas M. Stiger dba Stiger Rentals (Office of Administrative Hearings) – complaint, consent decree
    • The WSHRC alleged Thomas M. Stiger, doing business as Stiger Rentals, discriminated against one of his tenants when he refused to provide a reasonable accommodation made necessary by the tenant’s disability. The Consent Decree requires Mr. Stiger to pay general damages, implement a non-discrimination and reasonable accommodation policy compliant with state and federal fair housing laws, and undergo fair housing training.
  • WSHRC v. UDR, Inc., United Dominion Realty, L.P., and Ashwood Commons North, LLC (King County Superior Court) – amended complaint, consent decree
    • The WSHRC alleged the UDR defendants, owners and operators of the Elements Apartments in Bellevue, unlawfully discriminated against an African American tenant in the terms, conditions, and privileges of his housing, including the use of the gym, for conducting his personal training business, as compared to a similarly situated white resident trainer; retaliated against the tenant after he complained about discrimination; and created a hostile environment because of race and in retaliation for his complaints. The Consent Decree prohibits these practices and requires the housing provider to pay damages, revise its non-discrimination and reasonable accommodation policies to comply with state and federal fair housing laws, and undergo fair housing training.
  • WSHRC v. Merill Gardens L.L.C. and Merrill Gardens at Burien, LLC dba Merrill Gardens at Burien (King County Superior Court) – complaint, consent decree
    • The WSHRC alleged that an assisted living facility discriminated against a prospective independent living resident by requiring that she provide information about her medical condition and/or disability in order to live there, and refusing to rent to her when she declined to provide that information. The Consent Decree prohibits these practices and requires the assisted living facility to pay damages, revise its non-discrimination and reasonable accommodation policies to comply with state and federal fair housing laws, and undergo fair housing training.
  • WSHRC v. Housing Authority of the City of Seattle (King County Superior Court) - complaint
    • The WSHRC alleges the Seattle Housing Authority discriminated against a Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher applicant with disabilities when the Seattle Housing Authority refused to provide the applicant with a reasonable accommodation necessary for the applicant to reinstate a voucher.
  • WSHRC v. Toni Hamilton (Cowlitz County Superior Court) – complaint, consent decree
    • The WSHRC alleged that a landlord discriminated against a prospective tenant by failing to provide a reasonable accommodation for an emotional support animal, and by advertising rental properties in a way that indicates discrimination based on the need for a service or support animal to mitigate a disability. The Consent Decree prohibits these practices and requires the landlord to implement a Nondiscrimination and Reasonable Accommodation Policy and complete fair housing training.
  • WSHRC v. Cedars MM, LLC and Shelter Property Management, LLC (Pierce County Superior Court) – complaint, consent decree
    • The WSHRC alleged that a manufactured housing community and property management company discriminated against a homeowner by failing to provide a reasonable accommodation, and by making statements that indicated a preference or limitation based on the homeowner’s perceived disability. The Consent Decree prohibits these practices and requires the housing community and property management company to pay damages, revise their non-discrimination and reasonable accommodation policies to comply with state and federal fair housing laws, and undergo fair housing training.
  • WSHRC v. Lies, et al. (Clark County Superior Court) – petition for temporary restraining order, order granting temporary restraining order
    • The WSHRC filed a petition for temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction to enjoin respondents, Rudy and Brian Lies, from evicting their tenant before the WSHRC could investigate claims of discriminatory termination of tenancy and retaliation. The Court granted the temporary restraining order.
  • WSHRC v. Elvia Gomez Lopez (Yakima County Superior Court)  - complaint, consent decree
    • The WSHRC alleged that Elvia Gomez Lopez, who owns and operate several residential rental properties in Yakima, unlawfully discriminated against a single mother with young children and the children’s grandmother when the family applied to rent one of the owner’s properties and the owner denied the application because the applicants had young children in the household.  The Consent Decree requires Gomez Lopez to pay damages, attend fair housing training, and implement a nondiscrimination policy and procedure at all dwellings owned by Gomez Lopez.
  • WSHRC v. Elkins et al., (King County Superior Court) – complaint, consent decree
    • The WSHRC alleged that Andrea Elkins, who owns and operates several apartment units in King County, Washington, and her property management company unlawfully discriminated against a disabled child and her family when Ms. Elkins and her property manager refused to make reasonable accommodations, including repairs to unit conditions or a unit transfer, that would allow the child to live safely in her home. The Consent Decree prohibits Ms. Elkins from refusing to make reasonable accommodations to afford persons with a disability an equal opportunity to use and enjoy any home rented from Ms. Elkins. The Consent Decree further requires Ms. Elkins to pay damages, implement a Nondiscrimination and Reasonable Accommodation Policy at her rental properties, and undergo fair housing training. 
  • WSHRC v. Hughes Group LLC (Office of Administrative Hearings) – amended complaint, final order
    • The WSHRC’s investigation found that Hughes Group LLC, a Tacoma business that provides logistical, facilities, and supplies services, unlawfully retaliated against a human resources employee by terminating her after the she opposed a suggested reprimand against another employee for making a sexual harassment complaint. An administrative law judge affirmed WSHRC’s finding and ordered that Hughes Group compensate the complainant with back pay and out-of-pocket expenses including interest, as well as awarding the maximum amount of emotional distress damages allowed by statute.
  • WSHRC v. Reliable Enterprises and Reliable Project LLLP (Office of Administrative Hearings) –complaint, consent decree
    • The WSHRC alleged that a housing provider operating more than 120 units across Lewis County unlawfully discriminated against a tenant with a disability by terminating his tenancy because of disability, retaliating against him because of his requests to prevent harassment based on his disability, and imposing discriminatory terms and conditions against him because of his disability. The Consent Decree prohibits these types of practices, and requires the housing provider to pay damages, undergo fair housing training, and revise its policies to comply with state and federal fair housing laws.
  • WSHRC v. Phyllis McKee and Jonasson-McKee, LLC (Whatcom County Superior Court) – complaint, consent decree
    • The WSHRC alleged that Phyllis McKee, a landlord in Bellingham, unlawfully discriminated against a tenant with a disability, who sought permission to have an emotional support animal, by ignoring the tenant’s request for a reasonable accommodation, imposing different terms and conditions on the tenant because of the emotional support animal, and retaliating against the tenant after she complained about the discrimination. The Consent Decree prohibits these practices and requires the landlord to pay damages, revise her non-discrimination and reasonable accommodation policies to comply with state and federal fair housing laws, and undergo fair housing training.
  • WSHRC v. Alaska Airlines, Inc., (Office of Administrative Hearings) – amended complaint, consent decree
    • The WSHRC alleged that Alaska Airlines violated the Washington Law Against Discrimination by requiring a flight attendant who is non-binary to dress or groom in a manner that is not consistent with the employee’s gender identity and gender expression. The Consent Decree requires Alaska to pay damages and provide training to all supervisors, managers, and directors. The Consent Decree also prohibits Alaska from requiring any Alaska flight attendant to dress or groom in a manner that is not consistent with that person’s gender identity or gender expression, and from using gendered language in its uniform policy for flight attendants.