Background
Plaintiff Monica Jones, proceeding pro se, appealed a district court order that excluded her expert witness testimony and granted summary judgment to the City of Seattle and Seattle City Light. Jones alleged her termination violated public policy due to religious and racial discrimination and challenged the city’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The district court had previously ruled against Jones on her claims under the Washington Law Against Discrimination and the Washington Constitution.
The court’s reasoning
The Ninth Circuit reviewed the exclusion of expert testimony for abuse of discretion and the grant of summary judgment de novo. The court found the district court acted within its discretion to exclude experts because Jones failed to disclose them by the case management order deadline. Regarding the public policy tort claim, the court affirmed on the alternative ground that Jones did not create a genuine dispute of material fact showing that religious or racial discrimination was a significant factor in her termination. The court noted that Jones did not challenge the district court’s prior determinations on her Washington Law Against Discrimination claims. The court also affirmed summary judgment on her Washington Constitution claim because she failed to argue that the vaccine denial constituted a burden on her sincere religious belief for which the city lacked a compelling state interest. A partial dissent by Judge Bumatay argued that the pro se plaintiff’s briefs should be liberally construed to challenge the district court’s findings on religious discrimination and that the district court erred in dismissing her bona fide religious belief claim.
The dissent
The district court clearly erred in determining that Jones failed to create a genuine dispute of material fact as to her bona fide religious beliefs.
Bumatay
What it means going forward
The decision affirms the dismissal of the plaintiff’s claims, reinforcing that pro se litigants must still comply with procedural deadlines for expert disclosure and must specifically articulate the elements of their claims to survive summary judgment.