Case: Danny v. Laidlaw Transit Services 193 P.3d 128 (Wash. 2008) - Opinion by Justice Owens:
CASE QUESTIONS
1. What was the legal issue in this case? What did the appeals court decide?
2. Why, despite the fact that these employees left employment prior to the actual closure of the business, does the court conclude that they were affected employees who suffered employment loss? Why would the contrary conclusion be "inconsistent with the basic structure of the WARN Act and frustrate its purposes?"
3. What if employees faced with possible job loss in a downsizing accept severance packages? Would they no longer be affected employees because of voluntary departure or would they still be affected employees who left their jobs due to an imminent mass layoff? Why do you say that? (See Ellis v. DHL Express, 633 F.3d 522 (7th Cir. 2011), cert. denied, 2011 U.S. LEXIS 6619).
4. The court leaves open the possibility that the "faltering business" exception to the WARN Act's notification requirements might apply in this case. Would the employer likely prevail on these grounds? Why or why not?
5. Do you agree with the decision in this case? Why or why not?