Blair v. Washington State University case brief

Blair v. Washington State University case brief summary
740 P.2d 1379 (1987)

CASE SYNOPSIS

Plaintiff female athletes and their coaches sought review of a decision by the Superior Court of Whitman County (Washington), which excluded football from it calculations, excluded sports-generated revenue from university financial support, and eliminated a year's worth of damages because tort action was condition precedent to discrimination suit. Respondent university sought review of the attorney fee and cost awards.

CASE FACTS
Plaintiff female athletes and their coaches filed a discrimination suit against respondent university for inequities in the amount of funds available to plaintiff and the trial court entered an injunction.

DISCUSSION

• The court held that football should not have been excluded from trial court's calculations for participation opportunities, scholarships, and distribution of non-revenue funds because the Equal Rights Amendment, Wash. Const. art. 31, §§ 1, 2 (amend. 61), and Law Against Discrimination, Wash. Rev. Code § 49.60.030(1)(b), prohibited such exclusion. 
• The court affirmed the decision that each sport would be allowed to keep the revenue it generated. 
• The court held that the trial court abused its discretion in even considering plaintiff's public interest representation and remanded with instructions to ignore nonprofit status of plaintiff's counsel. 
• The court held that Wash. Rev. Code § 4.92.110 required plaintiff to file a tort claim as a condition precedent to bringing suit under § 49.60; thus, trial court's elimination of some damages was appropriate. 
• The court adopted the federal rule that allowed for more liberal recovery of costs by the prevailing party in civil rights litigation.

CONCLUSION
The court reversed and held that football should not have been excluded from calculations and the attorney fee should not have been reduced because plaintiff female athletes and their coaches' attorneys were public interest attorneys. The court affirmed and held that each sport of respondent university would be allowed to keep the revenue it generated and plaintiff was required to bring a tort action prior to filing the discrimination claim.

Suggested Study Aid For Sports Law