Source: http://nwlawyer.wsba.org/nwlawyer/march_2018?pg=49&lm=1521904005000
Timestamp: 2019-04-21 06:23:28+00:00

Document:
CONSENT IN ADVANCE OF A RECORDING.
Misconduct is a two-way street. Employees need to understand that their conduct may come under scrutiny even if they have been harassed or discriminated against. For instance, an employee who believes there is a gender-based pay disparity may seek to copy payroll records or documents to prove it. However, even if her suspicions are proven true, her actions could significantly impair any legal action she might prosecute. This was the general fact pattern in O’Day v.
F.3d 756, 758 (9th Cir. 1996), in which the plaintiff was overlooked for a promotion and subsequently searched his supervisor’s office, where he came across promotion recommendations and a “totem list.” The plaintiff copied the records and distributed them to other employees, even though the papers were marked sensitive and kept in a closed drawer.
Roake v. Delman, __ Wn.2d __, __ P.3d __ (Jan. 11, 2018); UW v. GEICO, 200 Wn. App. 455, 404 P.3d 559 (2017); Murray v. Southern Route Maritime SA, 870 F.3d 915 (2017); C.L. v. DSHS, 200 Wn. App. 189, 402 P.3d 346 (2017); Xia v. ProBuilders Specialty Insurance Company RRG, 188 Wn.2d 171, 400 P.3d 1234 (2017); Marriage of Ruff and Worthley, 198 Wn. App. 419, 393 P.3d 859 (2017); Boyd v. Sunflower Properties, LLC, 197 Wn. App. 137, 389 P.3d 626 (2016); Mutual of Enumclaw Insurance Co. v. Day, 197 Wn. App. 47, 387 P.3d 1084 (2016); Overlake Farms B.L.K. III, v. Bellevue-Overlake Farm, LLC, 196 Wn. App. 929, 386 P.3d 1118 (2016); Newman v. Highland School District No. 203, 186 Wn.2d 769, 381 P.3d 1188 (2016); Binschus v. State, 186 Wn.2d 573, 390 P.3d 468 (2016).

References: v.

 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.