Skip to main content

Segaline v. State, Dept. of Labor and Industries

Wash.April 3, 2009No. 81931-9Cited 2 times
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Published
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
appeal

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Outcome

Washington Supreme Court granted the petition for review, remanding the case back to the lower court for further proceedings.

What This Ruling Means

# Segaline v. State, Department of Labor and Industries ## What Happened Segaline filed an employment dispute against Washington's Department of Labor and Industries. The case went through the court system, and a lower court made a decision that Segaline disagreed with. ## What the Court Decided Washington's highest court, the Supreme Court, reviewed the case and decided the lower court needed to reconsider it. The Supreme Court sent the case back for a new hearing, rather than making a final ruling. This type of decision is called a "remand." ## Why This Matters for Workers This ruling shows that workers can appeal employment decisions to Washington's highest court. Even when a lower court rules against you, the Supreme Court may decide your case deserves another look. The court's decision to send the case back suggests there may have been problems with how the lower court handled it. Workers facing employment disputes with government agencies should understand that they have options to challenge unfavorable rulings through the appeal process.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Browse Related

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.