{ "attribution": { "source": "legal.exploreworldai.com", "canonical": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us:ca9-25-2325-2026-09-17", "cite_as": "NovaCopilot, legal.exploreworldai.com (https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us:ca9-25-2325-2026-09-17)", "license": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/revision", "version": "legal-2026-10-03", "fingerprint": "ewai:se:ee4348", "proof": "sha256:0f077140eab6ca9f79c68e42f7b00bc796359361a5d2cb0c2b46a0fe13d64114", "jurisdiction": "se", "lang": "en", "publisher": "NovaCopilot by ExploreWorld Legal", "terms": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/om" }, "brand_source": "Source: NovaCopilot", "brand": { "product": "NovaCopilot", "platform": "ExploreWorldAI", "infrastructure": "ExploreWorld Legal", "infrastructure_url": "legal.exploreworldai.com", "legal_entity": "Valkiv Ventures AB", "permanent_url": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/novacopilot", "source": "Source: NovaCopilot", "powered_by": "Powered by NovaCopilot", "license": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/licensvillkor", "contact": "stig@valkiv.com" }, "item": { "schema_version": "1.0.0", "id": "us:ca9-25-2325-2026-09-17", "jurisdiction": "us", "lang": "en", "brand_source": "Source: NovaCopilot", "brand": { "product": "NovaCopilot", "platform": "ExploreWorldAI", "infrastructure": "ExploreWorld Legal", "infrastructure_url": "legal.exploreworldai.com", "legal_entity": "Valkiv Ventures AB", "permanent_url": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/novacopilot", "source": "Source: NovaCopilot", "powered_by": "Powered by NovaCopilot", "license": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/licensvillkor", "contact": "stig@valkiv.com" }, "sections": [ { "title": "FOR PUBLICATION", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT", "paragraphs": [ "para_4", "para_5", "para_6" ] }, { "title": "EDGEWATER SERVICES, LLC;", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "GREGORY JONES; MATTHEW", "paragraphs": [ "para_9", "para_10" ] }, { "title": "No. 25-2325", "paragraphs": [ "para_12" ] }, { "title": "4:24-cv-05092-", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "TOR", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "Eastern District of", "paragraphs": [ "para_16" ] }, { "title": "Richland", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "ORDER", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "CERTIFYING", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "QUESTION TO", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "THE SUPREME", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "COURT OF", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "WASHINGTON", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "Filed September 17, 2026", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "Before: Jennifer Sung, Salvador Mendoza, Jr., and Roopali", "paragraphs": [ "para_26" ] }, { "title": "Order", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "2 HEIMBIGNER V. EDGEWATER SERVICES, LLC", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "SUMMARY*", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "Certification to Washington Supreme Court", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "The panel certified to the Washington Supreme Court the", "paragraphs": [ "para_32" ] }, { "title": "(1) Does Washington law recognize", "paragraphs": [ "para_34", "para_35" ] }, { "title": "(2) Does Washington law recognize", "paragraphs": [ "para_37", "para_38", "para_39" ] }, { "title": "COUNSEL", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "Michael C. Subit (argued) and Jack N. Miller, Frank Freed", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "Subit & Thomas LLP, Seattle, Washington, for Plaintiff-", "paragraphs": [ "para_43" ] }, { "title": "Thomas H. Petrides (argued) and Charlie Y. Wang, Vedder", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "Price LLP, Los Angeles, California; Brian Ledebuhr and", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "Kate L. Jungers, Vedder Price PC, Chicago, Illinois; Stephen", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "C. Willey, Fennemore Craig PC, Seattle, Washington; for", "paragraphs": [ "para_48", "para_49", "para_50" ] }, { "title": "HEIMBIGNER V. EDGEWATER SERVICES, LLC 3", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "ORDER", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "Martin Heimbigner appeals the district court’s dismissal", "paragraphs": [ "para_54", "para_55", "para_56", "para_57" ] }, { "title": "Whether Heimbigner failed to state a wrongful", "paragraphs": [ "para_59", "para_60" ] }, { "title": "(1) Does Washington law recognize", "paragraphs": [ "para_62", "para_63" ] }, { "title": "(2) Does Washington law recognize", "paragraphs": [ "para_65", "para_66", "para_67" ] }, { "title": "We may certify a question to the Washington Supreme", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "Court when, in our opinion, “it is necessary to ascertain the", "paragraphs": [ "para_70", "para_71" ] }, { "title": "Rev. Code § 2.60.020. We conclude both factors are met", "paragraphs": [ "para_73", "para_74", "para_75", "para_76", "para_77", "para_78", "para_79", "para_80" ] }, { "title": "4 HEIMBIGNER V. EDGEWATER SERVICES, LLC", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "BACKGROUND1", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "This diversity action arises from Plaintiff Martin", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "Heimbigner’s termination as the Chief Financial Officer", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "(“CFO”) of Solgen Enterprises, LLC (“Solgen”), a", "paragraphs": [ "para_87", "para_88", "para_89", "para_90" ] }, { "title": "30% interest in Solgen. At that time, Defendant Gregory", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "Jones, Edgewater’s President, joined Solgen’s Board of", "paragraphs": [ "para_93" ] }, { "title": "Edgewater and its executives largely directed and", "paragraphs": [ "para_95" ] }, { "title": "Edgewater directed Solgen to hire a new CFO using an", "paragraphs": [ "para_97", "para_98" ] }, { "title": "Edgewater’s President, Defendant Jones, and its Vice", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "President, Steven Resnick, interviewed Plaintiff and", "paragraphs": [ "para_101", "para_102", "para_103", "para_104", "para_105" ] }, { "title": "Solgen, but the agreement required Plaintiff to send any", "paragraphs": [ "para_107" ] }, { "title": "1 The following facts are taken from the Complaint. Because the district", "paragraphs": [ "para_109", "para_110", "para_111", "para_112", "para_113" ] }, { "title": "HEIMBIGNER V. EDGEWATER SERVICES, LLC 5", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "Edgewater. Heimbigner negotiated his compensation", "paragraphs": [ "para_116" ] }, { "title": "In January 2023, Solgen sought a bank loan from the", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce (“CIBC”) to finance", "paragraphs": [ "para_119", "para_120", "para_121" ] }, { "title": "(“GAAP”). It also required Heimbigner to certify that", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "Solgen’s financial statements were materially correct in", "paragraphs": [ "para_124" ] }, { "title": "Upon reviewing the statements, Heimbigner began to", "paragraphs": [ "para_126", "para_127", "para_128", "para_129", "para_130" ] }, { "title": "He presented his concerns to Moss Adams, the accounting", "paragraphs": [ "para_132", "para_133", "para_134", "para_135" ] }, { "title": "Board refused to make the recommended changes to the", "paragraphs": [ "para_137", "para_138" ] }, { "title": "Defendant Matthew Snyder, assumed an additional role as", "paragraphs": [ "para_140" ] }, { "title": "Snyder, and Resnick met with Heimbigner and Moss Adams", "paragraphs": [ "para_142", "para_143", "para_144" ] }, { "title": "Heimbigner to change his conclusion in several subsequent", "paragraphs": [ "para_146" ] }, { "title": "6 HEIMBIGNER V. EDGEWATER SERVICES, LLC", "paragraphs": [ "para_148", "para_149", "para_150" ] }, { "title": "Defendant Snyder met with Heimbigner in person and", "paragraphs": [ "para_152", "para_153" ] }, { "title": "On July 31, 2024, Heimbigner brought state law claims", "paragraphs": [ "para_155" ] }, { "title": "Washington public policy and intentional interference with", "paragraphs": [ "para_157", "para_158" ] }, { "title": "Defendants filed a motion to dismiss for lack of personal", "paragraphs": [ "para_160", "para_161", "para_162", "para_163" ] }, { "title": "II. THE CERTIFIED QUESTIONS", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "Heimbigner timely appealed both the dismissal of the", "paragraphs": [ "para_166", "para_167", "para_168", "para_169", "para_170", "para_171" ] }, { "title": "2 The district court denied the motion in part because it concluded that", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "Heimbigner stated a claim of intentional interference with contractual", "paragraphs": [ "para_174", "para_175" ] }, { "title": "3 We will explain our resolution of the personal jurisdiction issue when", "paragraphs": [ "para_177" ] }, { "title": "HEIMBIGNER V. EDGEWATER SERVICES, LLC 7", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "The district court dismissed the wrongful termination", "paragraphs": [ "para_180", "para_181", "para_182", "para_183" ] }, { "title": "On appeal, Heimbigner challenges the dismissal on two", "paragraphs": [ "para_185", "para_186", "para_187" ] }, { "title": "Jones, and Snyder—even assuming Jones and Snyder acted", "paragraphs": [ "para_189" ] }, { "title": "Heimbigner contends that, even if indirect employers cannot", "paragraphs": [ "para_191" ] }, { "title": "Edgewater must be dismissed), he still has stated a claim", "paragraphs": [ "para_193", "para_194", "para_195" ] }, { "title": "Defendants argue that indirect employer liability is", "paragraphs": [ "para_197", "para_198", "para_199", "para_200" ] }, { "title": "We must resolve both certified questions to fully resolve", "paragraphs": [ "para_202", "para_203" ] }, { "title": "Heimbigner has stated a wrongful termination claim against", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "4 Defendants argue that we should affirm the dismissal of the wrongful", "paragraphs": [ "para_206", "para_207", "para_208", "para_209", "para_210", "para_211" ] }, { "title": "8 HEIMBIGNER V. EDGEWATER SERVICES, LLC", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "Edgewater. If individuals can be liable for wrongful", "paragraphs": [ "para_214", "para_215" ] }, { "title": "Snyder. However, if there is neither indirect employer", "paragraphs": [ "para_217", "para_218", "para_219", "para_220" ] }, { "title": "A. Indirect Employer Liability", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "Whether Washington law categorically bars common-", "paragraphs": [ "para_223", "para_224" ] }, { "title": "Supreme Court has never addressed the question. And only", "paragraphs": [ "para_226", "para_227", "para_228" ] }, { "title": "In Awana, asbestos abatement workers alleged that their", "paragraphs": [ "para_230" ] }, { "title": "Port of Seattle, terminated their employment after they", "paragraphs": [ "para_232", "para_233", "para_234" ] }, { "title": "292, and the Superior Court granted summary judgment in", "paragraphs": [ "para_236", "para_237", "para_238", "para_239", "para_240", "para_241", "para_242", "para_243", "para_244" ] }, { "title": "HEIMBIGNER V. EDGEWATER SERVICES, LLC 9", "paragraphs": [ "para_246", "para_247", "para_248", "para_249", "para_250", "para_251", "para_252" ] }, { "title": "The plaintiffs also argued that the Port could be liable for", "paragraphs": [ "para_254", "para_255", "para_256", "para_257", "para_258", "para_259", "para_260", "para_261", "para_262", "para_263", "para_264", "para_265", "para_266" ] }, { "title": "5 The court also declined to hold that the Port could be liable for wrongful", "paragraphs": [ "para_268", "para_269", "para_270", "para_271", "para_272", "para_273" ] }, { "title": "Heimbigner argues that this aspect of the court’s reasoning was", "paragraphs": [ "para_275" ] }, { "title": "47 (Wash. 2015). Defendants contend Rose and Awana can be", "paragraphs": [ "para_277", "para_278", "para_279" ] }, { "title": "10 HEIMBIGNER V. EDGEWATER SERVICES, LLC", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "Heimbigner and Defendants each contend that Awana", "paragraphs": [ "para_282", "para_283", "para_284", "para_285", "para_286" ] }, { "title": "He further argues that he has alleged enough facts to show", "paragraphs": [ "para_288", "para_289", "para_290", "para_291", "para_292" ] }, { "title": "For their part, Defendants argue that Awana", "paragraphs": [ "para_294", "para_295", "para_296", "para_297", "para_298", "para_299", "para_300", "para_301", "para_302", "para_303", "para_304", "para_305", "para_306", "para_307" ] }, { "title": "In our view, Awana expressly left open the question", "paragraphs": [ "para_309", "para_310", "para_311", "para_312", "para_313" ] }, { "title": "HEIMBIGNER V. EDGEWATER SERVICES, LLC 11", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "Because the court concluded that the Port did not control the", "paragraphs": [ "para_316", "para_317" ] }, { "title": "The parties also discuss two federal district court cases", "paragraphs": [ "para_319" ] }, { "title": "Neither is persuasive authority on the issue because they", "paragraphs": [ "para_321" ] }, { "title": "Church Seattle, No. C05-0747C, 2006 WL 1009283, at *1–", "paragraphs": [ "para_323", "para_324" ] }, { "title": "10, 2016). Moreover, like Awana, neither squarely", "paragraphs": [ "para_326", "para_327", "para_328" ] }, { "title": "Recognizing there is no controlling precedent, both", "paragraphs": [ "para_330", "para_331" ] }, { "title": "Against Discrimination (“WLAD”) counsels adopting a", "paragraphs": [ "para_333", "para_334", "para_335", "para_336", "para_337", "para_338", "para_339" ] }, { "title": "Inc., 726 P.2d 434, 437 (Wash. 1986) (concluding a plaintiff", "paragraphs": [ "para_341", "para_342", "para_343", "para_344", "para_345", "para_346", "para_347" ] }, { "title": "12 HEIMBIGNER V. EDGEWATER SERVICES, LLC", "paragraphs": [ "para_349" ] }, { "title": "Hous. Auth. of Seattle, 821 P.2d 34, 42–43 (Wash. 1991)", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "(holding the same burden of proof applies to common-law", "paragraphs": [ "para_352", "para_353", "para_354" ] }, { "title": "For their part, Defendants highlight the Washington", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "Supreme Court’s description of the tort of wrongful", "paragraphs": [ "para_357" ] }, { "title": "See Becker v. Cmty. Health Sys., Inc., 359 P.3d 746, 749", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "(Wash. 2015). We note, however, that the Court in Becker", "paragraphs": [ "para_360", "para_361", "para_362", "para_363" ] }, { "title": "Thompson v. St. Regis Paper Co., 685 P.2d 1081, 1089", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "(Wash. 1984) (“We believe that this narrow public policy", "paragraphs": [ "para_366", "para_367" ] }, { "title": "These arguments involve exactly the type of “important", "paragraphs": [ "para_369", "para_370", "para_371", "para_372" ] }, { "title": "Washington Supreme Court to decide whether indirect", "paragraphs": [ "para_374", "para_375" ] }, { "title": "B. Individual Liability", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "Heimbigner alleges in the alternative that Snyder and", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "Jones acted as agents of Solgen, his direct employer, when", "paragraphs": [ "para_379", "para_380" ] }, { "title": "HEIMBIGNER V. EDGEWATER SERVICES, LLC 13", "paragraphs": [ "para_382", "para_383", "para_384", "para_385" ] }, { "title": "Whether Washington law recognizes wrongful", "paragraphs": [ "para_387", "para_388", "para_389", "para_390", "para_391" ] }, { "title": "In Blackman v. Omak School District, the plaintiff, a", "paragraphs": [ "para_393", "para_394", "para_395", "para_396" ] }, { "title": "2019). The superintendent moved to dismiss the plaintiff’s", "paragraphs": [ "para_398", "para_399", "para_400" ] }, { "title": "Washington Supreme Court has not yet resolved whether", "paragraphs": [ "para_402", "para_403" ] }, { "title": "Washington Supreme Court would recognize claims against", "paragraphs": [ "para_405", "para_406", "para_407", "para_408", "para_409" ] }, { "title": "6 If both indirect employers and individuals can be liable for wrongful", "paragraphs": [ "para_411", "para_412", "para_413" ] }, { "title": "14 HEIMBIGNER V. EDGEWATER SERVICES, LLC", "paragraphs": [ "para_415", "para_416", "para_417", "para_418", "para_419" ] }, { "title": "Four years later, another district court came to the same", "paragraphs": [ "para_421" ] }, { "title": "WL 8879124, at *3 (W.D. Wash. Dec. 22, 2023) (agreeing", "paragraphs": [ "para_423" ] }, { "title": "But, in Dahlstrom v. United States, the district court", "paragraphs": [ "para_425", "para_426", "para_427", "para_428", "para_429", "para_430", "para_431", "para_432", "para_433", "para_434", "para_435", "para_436", "para_437", "para_438", "para_439" ] }, { "title": "7 The Dahlstrom court also cited Jenkins v. Palmer, asserting that it held", "paragraphs": [ "para_441", "para_442" ] }, { "title": "But Jenkins did not so hold; rather, the court held that the plaintiff’s", "paragraphs": [ "para_444", "para_445" ] }, { "title": "HEIMBIGNER V. EDGEWATER SERVICES, LLC 15", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "In sum, the Washington Supreme Court has not", "paragraphs": [ "para_448", "para_449" ] }, { "title": "Court of Appeals decision, involved materially different", "paragraphs": [ "para_451", "para_452", "para_453", "para_454", "para_455", "para_456", "para_457", "para_458", "para_459", "para_460" ] }, { "title": "III. ORDER", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "We certify to the Washington Supreme Court the", "paragraphs": [ "para_463" ] }, { "title": "(1) Does Washington law recognize", "paragraphs": [ "para_465", "para_466" ] }, { "title": "(2) Does Washington law recognize", "paragraphs": [ "para_468", "para_469", "para_470" ] }, { "title": "We do not intend the phrasing of these questions to", "paragraphs": [ "para_472", "para_473", "para_474" ] }, { "title": "AG, 196 F.3d 1075, 1076 (9th Cir. 1999); Lenhardt v. Ford", "paragraphs": [ "para_476" ] }, { "title": "16 HEIMBIGNER V. EDGEWATER SERVICES, LLC", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "If the Washington Supreme Court accepts review of one", "paragraphs": [ "para_479" ] }, { "title": "Heimbigner as the party to file the first brief pursuant to", "paragraphs": [ "para_481" ] }, { "title": "The Clerk of Court is hereby ordered to transmit", "paragraphs": [ "para_483", "para_484" ] }, { "title": "Circuit, a copy of this order and all relevant briefs and", "paragraphs": [ "para_486" ] }, { "title": "Washington sections 2.60.010(4) and 2.60.030(2) and", "paragraphs": [ "para_488" ] }, { "title": "Further proceedings in this court on the certified", "paragraphs": [ "para_490", "para_491", "para_492", "para_493", "para_494", "para_495" ] }, { "title": "This panel will resume control and jurisdiction upon receipt", "paragraphs": [ "para_497" ] }, { "title": "Washington Supreme Court’s decision to decline to answer", "paragraphs": [ "para_499" ] }, { "title": "When the Washington Supreme Court decides whether", "paragraphs": [ "para_501", "para_502", "para_503" ] }, { "title": "Supreme Court accepts certification, the parties shall also", "paragraphs": [ "para_505", "para_506", "para_507", "para_508" ] }, { "title": "HEIMBIGNER V. EDGEWATER SERVICES, LLC 17", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "QUESTIONS CERTIFIED; PROCEEDINGS", "paragraphs": [ "para_511" ] } ], "paragraphs": [ { "text": "FOR PUBLICATION", "paragraph_id": "para_1" }, { "text": "UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS", "paragraph_id": "para_2" }, { "text": "FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT", "paragraph_id": "para_3" }, { "text": "MARTIN HEIMBIGNER,", "paragraph_id": "para_4" }, { "text": "Plaintiff - Appellant,", "paragraph_id": "para_5" }, { "text": "v.", "paragraph_id": "para_6" }, { "text": "EDGEWATER SERVICES, LLC;", "paragraph_id": "para_7" }, { "text": "GREGORY JONES; MATTHEW", "paragraph_id": "para_8" }, { "text": "SNYDER,", "paragraph_id": "para_9" }, { "text": "Defendants - Appellees.", "paragraph_id": "para_10" }, { "text": "No. 25-2325", "paragraph_id": "para_11" }, { "text": "D.C. No.", "paragraph_id": "para_12" }, { "text": "4:24-cv-05092-", "paragraph_id": "para_13" }, { "text": "TOR", "paragraph_id": "para_14" }, { "text": "Eastern District of", "paragraph_id": "para_15" }, { "text": "Washington,", "paragraph_id": "para_16" }, { "text": "Richland", "paragraph_id": "para_17" }, { "text": "ORDER", "paragraph_id": "para_18" }, { "text": "CERTIFYING", "paragraph_id": "para_19" }, { "text": "QUESTION TO", "paragraph_id": "para_20" }, { "text": "THE SUPREME", "paragraph_id": "para_21" }, { "text": "COURT OF", "paragraph_id": "para_22" }, { "text": "WASHINGTON", "paragraph_id": "para_23" }, { "text": "Filed September 17, 2026", "paragraph_id": "para_24" }, { "text": "Before: Jennifer Sung, Salvador Mendoza, Jr., and Roopali", "paragraph_id": "para_25" }, { "text": "H. Desai, Circuit Judges.", "paragraph_id": "para_26" }, { "text": "Order", "paragraph_id": "para_27" }, { "text": "2 HEIMBIGNER V. EDGEWATER SERVICES, LLC", "paragraph_id": "para_28" }, { "text": "SUMMARY*", "paragraph_id": "para_29" }, { "text": "Certification to Washington Supreme Court", "paragraph_id": "para_30" }, { "text": "The panel certified to the Washington Supreme Court the", "paragraph_id": "para_31" }, { "text": "following questions:", "paragraph_id": "para_32" }, { "text": "(1) Does Washington law recognize", "paragraph_id": "para_33" }, { "text": "common-law wrongful termination claims", "paragraph_id": "para_34" }, { "text": "against indirect employers?", "paragraph_id": "para_35" }, { "text": "(2) Does Washington law recognize", "paragraph_id": "para_36" }, { "text": "common-law wrongful termination claims", "paragraph_id": "para_37" }, { "text": "against individuals such as officers,", "paragraph_id": "para_38" }, { "text": "managers, or supervisors?", "paragraph_id": "para_39" }, { "text": "COUNSEL", "paragraph_id": "para_40" }, { "text": "Michael C. Subit (argued) and Jack N. Miller, Frank Freed", "paragraph_id": "para_41" }, { "text": "Subit & Thomas LLP, Seattle, Washington, for Plaintiff-", "paragraph_id": "para_42" }, { "text": "Appellant.", "paragraph_id": "para_43" }, { "text": "Thomas H. Petrides (argued) and Charlie Y. Wang, Vedder", "paragraph_id": "para_44" }, { "text": "Price LLP, Los Angeles, California; Brian Ledebuhr and", "paragraph_id": "para_45" }, { "text": "Kate L. Jungers, Vedder Price PC, Chicago, Illinois; Stephen", "paragraph_id": "para_46" }, { "text": "C. Willey, Fennemore Craig PC, Seattle, Washington; for", "paragraph_id": "para_47" }, { "text": "Defendants-Appellees.", "paragraph_id": "para_48" }, { "text": "* This summary constitutes no part of the opinion of the court. It has", "paragraph_id": "para_49" }, { "text": "been prepared by court staff for the convenience of the reader.", "paragraph_id": "para_50" }, { "text": "HEIMBIGNER V. EDGEWATER SERVICES, LLC 3", "paragraph_id": "para_51" }, { "text": "ORDER", "paragraph_id": "para_52" }, { "text": "Martin Heimbigner appeals the district court’s dismissal", "paragraph_id": "para_53" }, { "text": "of his common-law wrongful termination claim against his", "paragraph_id": "para_54" }, { "text": "indirect employer, Edgewater Services, LLC (“Edgewater”),", "paragraph_id": "para_55" }, { "text": "and two Edgewater executives (collectively, “Defendants”).", "paragraph_id": "para_56" }, { "text": "We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291.", "paragraph_id": "para_57" }, { "text": "Whether Heimbigner failed to state a wrongful", "paragraph_id": "para_58" }, { "text": "termination claim against Defendants turns on two", "paragraph_id": "para_59" }, { "text": "unresolved questions of Washington law:", "paragraph_id": "para_60" }, { "text": "(1) Does Washington law recognize", "paragraph_id": "para_61" }, { "text": "common-law wrongful termination", "paragraph_id": "para_62" }, { "text": "claims against indirect employers?", "paragraph_id": "para_63" }, { "text": "(2) Does Washington law recognize", "paragraph_id": "para_64" }, { "text": "common-law wrongful termination", "paragraph_id": "para_65" }, { "text": "claims against individuals such as", "paragraph_id": "para_66" }, { "text": "officers, managers, or supervisors?", "paragraph_id": "para_67" }, { "text": "We may certify a question to the Washington Supreme", "paragraph_id": "para_68" }, { "text": "Court when, in our opinion, “it is necessary to ascertain the", "paragraph_id": "para_69" }, { "text": "local law of [the] state in order to dispose of such proceeding", "paragraph_id": "para_70" }, { "text": "and the local law has not been clearly determined.” Wash.", "paragraph_id": "para_71" }, { "text": "Rev. Code § 2.60.020. We conclude both factors are met", "paragraph_id": "para_72" }, { "text": "here. Further, we exercise our discretion to certify these", "paragraph_id": "para_73" }, { "text": "questions because the state law issues involved present", "paragraph_id": "para_74" }, { "text": "important public policy ramifications and have broad", "paragraph_id": "para_75" }, { "text": "application. See High Country Paving, Inc. v. United Fire", "paragraph_id": "para_76" }, { "text": "& Cas. Co., 14 F.4th 976, 978 (9th Cir. 2021). Accordingly,", "paragraph_id": "para_77" }, { "text": "we respectfully ask the Washington Supreme Court to", "paragraph_id": "para_78" }, { "text": "exercise its discretion to decide one or both of the certified", "paragraph_id": "para_79" }, { "text": "questions described above.", "paragraph_id": "para_80" }, { "text": "4 HEIMBIGNER V. EDGEWATER SERVICES, LLC", "paragraph_id": "para_81" }, { "text": "I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL", "paragraph_id": "para_82" }, { "text": "BACKGROUND1", "paragraph_id": "para_83" }, { "text": "This diversity action arises from Plaintiff Martin", "paragraph_id": "para_84" }, { "text": "Heimbigner’s termination as the Chief Financial Officer", "paragraph_id": "para_85" }, { "text": "(“CFO”) of Solgen Enterprises, LLC (“Solgen”), a", "paragraph_id": "para_86" }, { "text": "residential solar power sales and installation company based", "paragraph_id": "para_87" }, { "text": "in Pasco, Washington. Defendant Edgewater is an", "paragraph_id": "para_88" }, { "text": "investment advisory firm registered in Delaware and based", "paragraph_id": "para_89" }, { "text": "in Chicago, Illinois. In May 2022, Edgewater acquired a", "paragraph_id": "para_90" }, { "text": "30% interest in Solgen. At that time, Defendant Gregory", "paragraph_id": "para_91" }, { "text": "Jones, Edgewater’s President, joined Solgen’s Board of", "paragraph_id": "para_92" }, { "text": "Directors.", "paragraph_id": "para_93" }, { "text": "Edgewater and its executives largely directed and", "paragraph_id": "para_94" }, { "text": "facilitated Heimbigner’s recruitment. In September 2022,", "paragraph_id": "para_95" }, { "text": "Edgewater directed Solgen to hire a new CFO using an", "paragraph_id": "para_96" }, { "text": "executive search firm. The firm and Edgewater executives", "paragraph_id": "para_97" }, { "text": "jointly selected Heimbigner as a candidate for the position.", "paragraph_id": "para_98" }, { "text": "Edgewater’s President, Defendant Jones, and its Vice", "paragraph_id": "para_99" }, { "text": "President, Steven Resnick, interviewed Plaintiff and", "paragraph_id": "para_100" }, { "text": "performed a final reference check. In November, Solgen’s", "paragraph_id": "para_101" }, { "text": "Chief Executive Officer emailed Heimbigner an offer letter,", "paragraph_id": "para_102" }, { "text": "copying Jones on the email. Heimbigner accepted the", "paragraph_id": "para_103" }, { "text": "position and signed an employment agreement. The only", "paragraph_id": "para_104" }, { "text": "parties to the employment agreement were Heimbigner and", "paragraph_id": "para_105" }, { "text": "Solgen, but the agreement required Plaintiff to send any", "paragraph_id": "para_106" }, { "text": "notices related to the agreement to both Solgen and", "paragraph_id": "para_107" }, { "text": "1 The following facts are taken from the Complaint. Because the district", "paragraph_id": "para_108" }, { "text": "court dismissed the action at the pleading stage, “[u]ncontroverted", "paragraph_id": "para_109" }, { "text": "allegations in the complaint must be taken as true, and conflicts over", "paragraph_id": "para_110" }, { "text": "statements contained in affidavits must be resolved in [the plaintiff’s]", "paragraph_id": "para_111" }, { "text": "favor.” Love v. Associated Newspapers, Ltd., 611 F.3d 601, 608 (9th", "paragraph_id": "para_112" }, { "text": "Cir. 2010).", "paragraph_id": "para_113" }, { "text": "HEIMBIGNER V. EDGEWATER SERVICES, LLC 5", "paragraph_id": "para_114" }, { "text": "Edgewater. Heimbigner negotiated his compensation", "paragraph_id": "para_115" }, { "text": "package with Edgewater executives.", "paragraph_id": "para_116" }, { "text": "In January 2023, Solgen sought a bank loan from the", "paragraph_id": "para_117" }, { "text": "Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce (“CIBC”) to finance", "paragraph_id": "para_118" }, { "text": "its acquisition of a solar installation company. The loan", "paragraph_id": "para_119" }, { "text": "agreement required Solgen to perform a financial audit in", "paragraph_id": "para_120" }, { "text": "accordance with generally accepted accounting principles", "paragraph_id": "para_121" }, { "text": "(“GAAP”). It also required Heimbigner to certify that", "paragraph_id": "para_122" }, { "text": "Solgen’s financial statements were materially correct in", "paragraph_id": "para_123" }, { "text": "accordance with GAAP.", "paragraph_id": "para_124" }, { "text": "Upon reviewing the statements, Heimbigner began to", "paragraph_id": "para_125" }, { "text": "suspect that Solgen had been prematurely recognizing", "paragraph_id": "para_126" }, { "text": "revenue—that is, Solgen recognized revenue when a solar", "paragraph_id": "para_127" }, { "text": "panel was installed, rather than when it began generating", "paragraph_id": "para_128" }, { "text": "electricity. He believed that this practice misleadingly", "paragraph_id": "para_129" }, { "text": "inflated Solgen’s reported revenue in violation of GAAP.", "paragraph_id": "para_130" }, { "text": "He presented his concerns to Moss Adams, the accounting", "paragraph_id": "para_131" }, { "text": "firm hired to conduct the audit, and Moss Adams agreed that", "paragraph_id": "para_132" }, { "text": "this practice violated GAAP. Heimbigner and Moss Adams", "paragraph_id": "para_133" }, { "text": "brought their concerns to Solgen’s Board of Directors, on", "paragraph_id": "para_134" }, { "text": "which Jones and another Edgewater executive sat, but the", "paragraph_id": "para_135" }, { "text": "Board refused to make the recommended changes to the", "paragraph_id": "para_136" }, { "text": "financial statements.", "paragraph_id": "para_137" }, { "text": "In July 2023, Edgewater’s Chief Operating Officer,", "paragraph_id": "para_138" }, { "text": "Defendant Matthew Snyder, assumed an additional role as", "paragraph_id": "para_139" }, { "text": "Solgen’s Chief Restructuring Officer. On August 8, Jones,", "paragraph_id": "para_140" }, { "text": "Snyder, and Resnick met with Heimbigner and Moss Adams", "paragraph_id": "para_141" }, { "text": "representatives and attempted to convince them to change", "paragraph_id": "para_142" }, { "text": "their conclusion that Solgen’s financial statements were", "paragraph_id": "para_143" }, { "text": "materially false. Jones, Snyder, and Resnick also pressured", "paragraph_id": "para_144" }, { "text": "Heimbigner to change his conclusion in several subsequent", "paragraph_id": "para_145" }, { "text": "calls, text communications, Zoom meetings, and email", "paragraph_id": "para_146" }, { "text": "6 HEIMBIGNER V. EDGEWATER SERVICES, LLC", "paragraph_id": "para_147" }, { "text": "exchanges. When Heimbigner refused, Jones and Snyder", "paragraph_id": "para_148" }, { "text": "excluded Heimbigner from all calls regarding Solgen’s", "paragraph_id": "para_149" }, { "text": "finances, including calls with CIBC. On August 15,", "paragraph_id": "para_150" }, { "text": "Defendant Snyder met with Heimbigner in person and", "paragraph_id": "para_151" }, { "text": "terminated him. Edgewater subsequently terminated its", "paragraph_id": "para_152" }, { "text": "contractual relationship with Moss Adams.", "paragraph_id": "para_153" }, { "text": "On July 31, 2024, Heimbigner brought state law claims", "paragraph_id": "para_154" }, { "text": "for common-law wrongful termination in violation of", "paragraph_id": "para_155" }, { "text": "Washington public policy and intentional interference with", "paragraph_id": "para_156" }, { "text": "contractual relations against Edgewater, Snyder, and Jones", "paragraph_id": "para_157" }, { "text": "(collectively, “Defendants”). On January 17, 2025,", "paragraph_id": "para_158" }, { "text": "Defendants filed a motion to dismiss for lack of personal", "paragraph_id": "para_159" }, { "text": "jurisdiction and for failure to state a claim. The district court", "paragraph_id": "para_160" }, { "text": "granted the motion in part, dismissing the action for lack of", "paragraph_id": "para_161" }, { "text": "personal jurisdiction and dismissing the wrongful", "paragraph_id": "para_162" }, { "text": "termination claim with prejudice for failure to state a claim.2", "paragraph_id": "para_163" }, { "text": "II. THE CERTIFIED QUESTIONS", "paragraph_id": "para_164" }, { "text": "Heimbigner timely appealed both the dismissal of the", "paragraph_id": "para_165" }, { "text": "action for lack of personal jurisdiction and the dismissal of", "paragraph_id": "para_166" }, { "text": "his wrongful termination claim with prejudice. We conclude", "paragraph_id": "para_167" }, { "text": "that the district court erred in dismissing the action for lack", "paragraph_id": "para_168" }, { "text": "of personal jurisdiction.3 Consequently, we must decide", "paragraph_id": "para_169" }, { "text": "whether we should affirm the dismissal of Heimbigner’s", "paragraph_id": "para_170" }, { "text": "wrongful termination claim for failure to state a claim.", "paragraph_id": "para_171" }, { "text": "2 The district court denied the motion in part because it concluded that", "paragraph_id": "para_172" }, { "text": "Heimbigner stated a claim of intentional interference with contractual", "paragraph_id": "para_173" }, { "text": "relations against all Defendants, but that claim is not at issue in this", "paragraph_id": "para_174" }, { "text": "appeal.", "paragraph_id": "para_175" }, { "text": "3 We will explain our resolution of the personal jurisdiction issue when", "paragraph_id": "para_176" }, { "text": "we issue our final disposition.", "paragraph_id": "para_177" }, { "text": "HEIMBIGNER V. EDGEWATER SERVICES, LLC 7", "paragraph_id": "para_178" }, { "text": "The district court dismissed the wrongful termination", "paragraph_id": "para_179" }, { "text": "claim against all Defendants (Edgewater, Jones, and Snyder)", "paragraph_id": "para_180" }, { "text": "because it concluded that only a direct employer can be", "paragraph_id": "para_181" }, { "text": "liable for wrongful termination, and it is undisputed that", "paragraph_id": "para_182" }, { "text": "Solgen, not Edgewater, was Heimbigner’s direct employer.", "paragraph_id": "para_183" }, { "text": "On appeal, Heimbigner challenges the dismissal on two", "paragraph_id": "para_184" }, { "text": "grounds: First, Heimbigner contends that indirect employers", "paragraph_id": "para_185" }, { "text": "can be liable for wrongful termination under Washington", "paragraph_id": "para_186" }, { "text": "law, and that therefore, he stated a claim against Edgewater,", "paragraph_id": "para_187" }, { "text": "Jones, and Snyder—even assuming Jones and Snyder acted", "paragraph_id": "para_188" }, { "text": "as agents of Edgewater when they terminated him. Second,", "paragraph_id": "para_189" }, { "text": "Heimbigner contends that, even if indirect employers cannot", "paragraph_id": "para_190" }, { "text": "be liable for wrongful termination (and his claim against", "paragraph_id": "para_191" }, { "text": "Edgewater must be dismissed), he still has stated a claim", "paragraph_id": "para_192" }, { "text": "against Defendants Jones and Snyder because he", "paragraph_id": "para_193" }, { "text": "alternatively alleges that they acted as agents of his direct", "paragraph_id": "para_194" }, { "text": "employer, Solgen, when they terminated him. In response,", "paragraph_id": "para_195" }, { "text": "Defendants argue that indirect employer liability is", "paragraph_id": "para_196" }, { "text": "unavailable, and that, even if Jones and Snyder acted as", "paragraph_id": "para_197" }, { "text": "agents of Solgen, the claim against them should still be", "paragraph_id": "para_198" }, { "text": "dismissed because individuals cannot be liable for wrongful", "paragraph_id": "para_199" }, { "text": "termination under Washington law.4", "paragraph_id": "para_200" }, { "text": "We must resolve both certified questions to fully resolve", "paragraph_id": "para_201" }, { "text": "this appeal: If an indirect employer can be liable for", "paragraph_id": "para_202" }, { "text": "wrongful termination under Washington law, then", "paragraph_id": "para_203" }, { "text": "Heimbigner has stated a wrongful termination claim against", "paragraph_id": "para_204" }, { "text": "4 Defendants argue that we should affirm the dismissal of the wrongful", "paragraph_id": "para_205" }, { "text": "termination claim on several other grounds, including that Heimbigner", "paragraph_id": "para_206" }, { "text": "failed to allege a violation of public policy, and that he failed to allege", "paragraph_id": "para_207" }, { "text": "sufficient facts showing that Jones or Edgewater participated in the", "paragraph_id": "para_208" }, { "text": "termination. Because we resolve those issues in Heimbigner’s favor, the", "paragraph_id": "para_209" }, { "text": "outcome of this appeal turns on the two state-law questions we certify", "paragraph_id": "para_210" }, { "text": "here. We will explain our reasoning when we issue our final disposition.", "paragraph_id": "para_211" }, { "text": "8 HEIMBIGNER V. EDGEWATER SERVICES, LLC", "paragraph_id": "para_212" }, { "text": "Edgewater. If individuals can be liable for wrongful", "paragraph_id": "para_213" }, { "text": "termination under Washington law, then Heimbigner has", "paragraph_id": "para_214" }, { "text": "stated a wrongful termination claim against Jones and", "paragraph_id": "para_215" }, { "text": "Snyder. However, if there is neither indirect employer", "paragraph_id": "para_216" }, { "text": "liability nor individual liability for wrongful termination", "paragraph_id": "para_217" }, { "text": "claims, then Heimbigner has failed to state a claim against", "paragraph_id": "para_218" }, { "text": "any of the Defendants, and the district court correctly", "paragraph_id": "para_219" }, { "text": "dismissed the claim with prejudice.", "paragraph_id": "para_220" }, { "text": "A. Indirect Employer Liability", "paragraph_id": "para_221" }, { "text": "Whether Washington law categorically bars common-", "paragraph_id": "para_222" }, { "text": "law wrongful termination claims against indirect employers", "paragraph_id": "para_223" }, { "text": "is an unsettled question of state law. The Washington", "paragraph_id": "para_224" }, { "text": "Supreme Court has never addressed the question. And only", "paragraph_id": "para_225" }, { "text": "one published Washington Court of Appeals case has", "paragraph_id": "para_226" }, { "text": "considered the issue, but it left the question open. Awana v.", "paragraph_id": "para_227" }, { "text": "Port of Seattle, 89 P.3d 291, 293–95 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004).", "paragraph_id": "para_228" }, { "text": "In Awana, asbestos abatement workers alleged that their", "paragraph_id": "para_229" }, { "text": "direct employer, Alpha, a government contractor with the", "paragraph_id": "para_230" }, { "text": "Port of Seattle, terminated their employment after they", "paragraph_id": "para_231" }, { "text": "complained about work safety violations at the Seattle", "paragraph_id": "para_232" }, { "text": "airport. Id. at 291–92. The workers brought wrongful", "paragraph_id": "para_233" }, { "text": "termination claims against both Alpha and the Port, id. at", "paragraph_id": "para_234" }, { "text": "292, and the Superior Court granted summary judgment in", "paragraph_id": "para_235" }, { "text": "favor of the Port. Id. The Washington Court of Appeals", "paragraph_id": "para_236" }, { "text": "affirmed. Id. at 295. The court first explained that “[a]n", "paragraph_id": "para_237" }, { "text": "action for wrongful discharge depends, by definition, upon", "paragraph_id": "para_238" }, { "text": "termination of employment,” but that the plaintiffs “were not", "paragraph_id": "para_239" }, { "text": "employees of the Port, and the Port did not terminate their", "paragraph_id": "para_240" }, { "text": "employment.” Id. at 292. Then, the court addressed the", "paragraph_id": "para_241" }, { "text": "plaintiffs’ arguments that a direct employment relationship", "paragraph_id": "para_242" }, { "text": "is not required to establish liability. Id. at 292–94. The", "paragraph_id": "para_243" }, { "text": "plaintiffs first argued that the Port could still be liable", "paragraph_id": "para_244" }, { "text": "HEIMBIGNER V. EDGEWATER SERVICES, LLC 9", "paragraph_id": "para_245" }, { "text": "because, as the owner and general contractor for the airport", "paragraph_id": "para_246" }, { "text": "renovation, it had a duty to protect them from hazards, and", "paragraph_id": "para_247" }, { "text": "that duty should include a duty to protect them from", "paragraph_id": "para_248" }, { "text": "retaliation for reporting safety hazards. Id. at 293. The court", "paragraph_id": "para_249" }, { "text": "rejected that argument because the Port’s control over the", "paragraph_id": "para_250" }, { "text": "worksite did not confer control over the employment of its", "paragraph_id": "para_251" }, { "text": "subcontractor’s employees. Id.", "paragraph_id": "para_252" }, { "text": "The plaintiffs also argued that the Port could be liable for", "paragraph_id": "para_253" }, { "text": "wrongful termination because it exercised such great control", "paragraph_id": "para_254" }, { "text": "over them such that it was their “de facto employer.” Id.", "paragraph_id": "para_255" }, { "text": "Although the court also rejected this argument, in doing so,", "paragraph_id": "para_256" }, { "text": "it did not address whether a de facto employer could be liable", "paragraph_id": "para_257" }, { "text": "for wrongful termination as a matter of law; rather, it", "paragraph_id": "para_258" }, { "text": "explained that the record showed the Port lacked any", "paragraph_id": "para_259" }, { "text": "authority to intervene in the direct employer’s employee", "paragraph_id": "para_260" }, { "text": "relations. Id. (“Whatever the Port controlled, it was not [the", "paragraph_id": "para_261" }, { "text": "plaintiffs’] de facto employer.”). See also id. (An", "paragraph_id": "para_262" }, { "text": "“owner/contractor [cannot] carry out a duty to refrain from", "paragraph_id": "para_263" }, { "text": "retaliatory discharge of workers employed by", "paragraph_id": "para_264" }, { "text": "subcontractors” if it does not have “control over the", "paragraph_id": "para_265" }, { "text": "employment of a subcontractor’s workers.”).5", "paragraph_id": "para_266" }, { "text": "5 The court also declined to hold that the Port could be liable for wrongful", "paragraph_id": "para_267" }, { "text": "termination, even if it encouraged the plaintiffs’ direct employer to", "paragraph_id": "para_268" }, { "text": "terminate them, because “[c]ourts generally extend tort doctrines only", "paragraph_id": "para_269" }, { "text": "where existing remedies are inadequate.” Awana, 89 P.3d at 294. And", "paragraph_id": "para_270" }, { "text": "the plaintiffs could pursue other remedies: “a cause of action for tortious", "paragraph_id": "para_271" }, { "text": "interference against the Port,” and a “whistleblower action for wrongful", "paragraph_id": "para_272" }, { "text": "discharge in violation of public policy” against their direct employer. Id.", "paragraph_id": "para_273" }, { "text": "Heimbigner argues that this aspect of the court’s reasoning was", "paragraph_id": "para_274" }, { "text": "abrogated by Rose v. Anderson Hay & Grain Co., 358 P.3d 1139, 1145–", "paragraph_id": "para_275" }, { "text": "47 (Wash. 2015). Defendants contend Rose and Awana can be", "paragraph_id": "para_276" }, { "text": "reconciled. At a minimum, Rose casts doubt on this aspect of Awana’s", "paragraph_id": "para_277" }, { "text": "reasoning and thus underscores the uncertainty in the law. This", "paragraph_id": "para_278" }, { "text": "uncertainty supports certifying the issue Awana left open.", "paragraph_id": "para_279" }, { "text": "10 HEIMBIGNER V. EDGEWATER SERVICES, LLC", "paragraph_id": "para_280" }, { "text": "Heimbigner and Defendants each contend that Awana", "paragraph_id": "para_281" }, { "text": "supports their position. Heimbigner argues that Awana", "paragraph_id": "para_282" }, { "text": "impliedly recognized that an indirect or “de facto” employer", "paragraph_id": "para_283" }, { "text": "can be liable for wrongful termination and concluded only", "paragraph_id": "para_284" }, { "text": "that the Port was not the plaintiffs’ de facto employer", "paragraph_id": "para_285" }, { "text": "because it lacked control over the plaintiffs’ employment.", "paragraph_id": "para_286" }, { "text": "He further argues that he has alleged enough facts to show", "paragraph_id": "para_287" }, { "text": "that Edgewater exercised control over his employment,", "paragraph_id": "para_288" }, { "text": "including his termination, and therefore was his de facto", "paragraph_id": "para_289" }, { "text": "employer. Thus, Heimbigner contends, even under Awana,", "paragraph_id": "para_290" }, { "text": "he has stated a wrongful termination claim against", "paragraph_id": "para_291" }, { "text": "Edgewater.", "paragraph_id": "para_292" }, { "text": "For their part, Defendants argue that Awana", "paragraph_id": "para_293" }, { "text": "categorically held that indirect employers cannot be liable", "paragraph_id": "para_294" }, { "text": "for wrongful termination, even if they are de facto", "paragraph_id": "para_295" }, { "text": "employers. In their view, Awana “reject[ed] the plaintiffs’", "paragraph_id": "para_296" }, { "text": "‘de facto’ theory because it was ‘based entirely upon cases", "paragraph_id": "para_297" }, { "text": "distinguishing employees from independent contractors.’”", "paragraph_id": "para_298" }, { "text": "Because the plaintiffs were not independent contractors,", "paragraph_id": "para_299" }, { "text": "their “de facto” theory failed, and the court’s discussion of", "paragraph_id": "para_300" }, { "text": "whether the Port was the plaintiffs’ de facto employer was", "paragraph_id": "para_301" }, { "text": "dicta. Defendants also argue that excluding indirect", "paragraph_id": "para_302" }, { "text": "employers from liability for wrongful termination is", "paragraph_id": "para_303" }, { "text": "consistent with the Awana Court’s statement that the", "paragraph_id": "para_304" }, { "text": "wrongful termination doctrine is a “narrow” exception to the", "paragraph_id": "para_305" }, { "text": "general rule that employers have discretion to terminate", "paragraph_id": "para_306" }, { "text": "employees at will.", "paragraph_id": "para_307" }, { "text": "In our view, Awana expressly left open the question", "paragraph_id": "para_308" }, { "text": "whether an indirect, de facto employer can be liable for", "paragraph_id": "para_309" }, { "text": "wrongful termination. Id. at 294–95 (noting that the", "paragraph_id": "para_310" }, { "text": "“wrongful discharge doctrine must be extended with", "paragraph_id": "para_311" }, { "text": "caution,” but that “[p]erhaps a case can be made for its", "paragraph_id": "para_312" }, { "text": "application outside the traditional employment context.”).", "paragraph_id": "para_313" }, { "text": "HEIMBIGNER V. EDGEWATER SERVICES, LLC 11", "paragraph_id": "para_314" }, { "text": "Because the court concluded that the Port did not control the", "paragraph_id": "para_315" }, { "text": "plaintiffs’ employment, the court did not reach the question", "paragraph_id": "para_316" }, { "text": "presented here.", "paragraph_id": "para_317" }, { "text": "The parties also discuss two federal district court cases", "paragraph_id": "para_318" }, { "text": "addressing Washington wrongful termination claims.", "paragraph_id": "para_319" }, { "text": "Neither is persuasive authority on the issue because they", "paragraph_id": "para_320" }, { "text": "each rely exclusively on Awana. See MacDonald v. Grace", "paragraph_id": "para_321" }, { "text": "Church Seattle, No. C05-0747C, 2006 WL 1009283, at *1–", "paragraph_id": "para_322" }, { "text": "3 (W.D. Wash. Apr. 14, 2006); Bailey v. Alpha Techs. Inc.,", "paragraph_id": "para_323" }, { "text": "No. C16-0727, 2016 WL 4211527, at *3 (W.D. Wash. Aug.", "paragraph_id": "para_324" }, { "text": "10, 2016). Moreover, like Awana, neither squarely", "paragraph_id": "para_325" }, { "text": "addresses whether an indirect employer can be liable for", "paragraph_id": "para_326" }, { "text": "wrongful termination if it had control over the plaintiff’s", "paragraph_id": "para_327" }, { "text": "employment.", "paragraph_id": "para_328" }, { "text": "Recognizing there is no controlling precedent, both", "paragraph_id": "para_329" }, { "text": "parties make policy arguments in favor of their respective", "paragraph_id": "para_330" }, { "text": "positions. Heimbigner argues that the Washington Law", "paragraph_id": "para_331" }, { "text": "Against Discrimination (“WLAD”) counsels adopting a", "paragraph_id": "para_332" }, { "text": "broad definition of “employer” for the purpose of common-", "paragraph_id": "para_333" }, { "text": "law wrongful termination claims. The WLAD defines", "paragraph_id": "para_334" }, { "text": "“employer” broadly as “any person acting in the interest of", "paragraph_id": "para_335" }, { "text": "an employer, directly or indirectly.” Wash. Rev. Code", "paragraph_id": "para_336" }, { "text": "§ 49.60.040(11). And the Washington Supreme Court has,", "paragraph_id": "para_337" }, { "text": "at times, looked to the WLAD for guidance in common-law", "paragraph_id": "para_338" }, { "text": "wrongful termination cases. E.g., Cagle v. Burns and Roe,", "paragraph_id": "para_339" }, { "text": "Inc., 726 P.2d 434, 437 (Wash. 1986) (concluding a plaintiff", "paragraph_id": "para_340" }, { "text": "may recover emotional distress damages for common-law", "paragraph_id": "para_341" }, { "text": "wrongful termination because the WLAD “illustrate[s] this", "paragraph_id": "para_342" }, { "text": "state’s policy favoring awards of damages for emotional", "paragraph_id": "para_343" }, { "text": "distress”); id. (“[B]ecause discriminatory termination of", "paragraph_id": "para_344" }, { "text": "employment [under the WLAD] embodies a clear mandate", "paragraph_id": "para_345" }, { "text": "of public policy, it is analogous to wrongful termination of", "paragraph_id": "para_346" }, { "text": "employment in violation of public policy, and is therefore", "paragraph_id": "para_347" }, { "text": "12 HEIMBIGNER V. EDGEWATER SERVICES, LLC", "paragraph_id": "para_348" }, { "text": "persuasive authority in this case.”); see also, e.g., Allison v.", "paragraph_id": "para_349" }, { "text": "Hous. Auth. of Seattle, 821 P.2d 34, 42–43 (Wash. 1991)", "paragraph_id": "para_350" }, { "text": "(holding the same burden of proof applies to common-law", "paragraph_id": "para_351" }, { "text": "wrongful termination claims involving retaliation for filing", "paragraph_id": "para_352" }, { "text": "a workers’ compensation claim and WLAD cases involving", "paragraph_id": "para_353" }, { "text": "retaliation for filing a discrimination claim).", "paragraph_id": "para_354" }, { "text": "For their part, Defendants highlight the Washington", "paragraph_id": "para_355" }, { "text": "Supreme Court’s description of the tort of wrongful", "paragraph_id": "para_356" }, { "text": "termination as a “narrow” exception to at-will employment.", "paragraph_id": "para_357" }, { "text": "See Becker v. Cmty. Health Sys., Inc., 359 P.3d 746, 749", "paragraph_id": "para_358" }, { "text": "(Wash. 2015). We note, however, that the Court in Becker", "paragraph_id": "para_359" }, { "text": "also explained that this narrow exception is “recognized as a", "paragraph_id": "para_360" }, { "text": "means of encouraging employees to follow the law and", "paragraph_id": "para_361" }, { "text": "preventing employers from using the at-will doctrine to", "paragraph_id": "para_362" }, { "text": "subvert those efforts to promote public policy.” Id.; see also", "paragraph_id": "para_363" }, { "text": "Thompson v. St. Regis Paper Co., 685 P.2d 1081, 1089", "paragraph_id": "para_364" }, { "text": "(Wash. 1984) (“We believe that this narrow public policy", "paragraph_id": "para_365" }, { "text": "exception should be adopted because it properly balances the", "paragraph_id": "para_366" }, { "text": "interest of both the employer and employee.”).", "paragraph_id": "para_367" }, { "text": "These arguments involve exactly the type of “important", "paragraph_id": "para_368" }, { "text": "public policy ramifications” with “broad application” that", "paragraph_id": "para_369" }, { "text": "the Washington Supreme Court should consider in the first", "paragraph_id": "para_370" }, { "text": "instance. High Country Paving, Inc., 14 F.4th at 978. Thus,", "paragraph_id": "para_371" }, { "text": "“in the spirit of comity and federalism,” id., we ask the", "paragraph_id": "para_372" }, { "text": "Washington Supreme Court to decide whether indirect", "paragraph_id": "para_373" }, { "text": "employers may be liable for common-law wrongful", "paragraph_id": "para_374" }, { "text": "termination.", "paragraph_id": "para_375" }, { "text": "B. Individual Liability", "paragraph_id": "para_376" }, { "text": "Heimbigner alleges in the alternative that Snyder and", "paragraph_id": "para_377" }, { "text": "Jones acted as agents of Solgen, his direct employer, when", "paragraph_id": "para_378" }, { "text": "they orchestrated his termination. If, under Washington law,", "paragraph_id": "para_379" }, { "text": "individuals such as officers, managers, or supervisors may", "paragraph_id": "para_380" }, { "text": "HEIMBIGNER V. EDGEWATER SERVICES, LLC 13", "paragraph_id": "para_381" }, { "text": "be liable for wrongful termination, then the district court", "paragraph_id": "para_382" }, { "text": "erred in dismissing Heimbigner’s wrongful termination", "paragraph_id": "para_383" }, { "text": "claim against Snyder and Jones in their capacities as agents", "paragraph_id": "para_384" }, { "text": "of Solgen, even if indirect employers cannot be liable.6", "paragraph_id": "para_385" }, { "text": "Whether Washington law recognizes wrongful", "paragraph_id": "para_386" }, { "text": "termination claims against individuals such as officers,", "paragraph_id": "para_387" }, { "text": "managers, or supervisors is also an unsettled question of law.", "paragraph_id": "para_388" }, { "text": "The Washington Supreme Court has not addressed the issue,", "paragraph_id": "para_389" }, { "text": "and federal district courts disagree about how the court", "paragraph_id": "para_390" }, { "text": "would rule.", "paragraph_id": "para_391" }, { "text": "In Blackman v. Omak School District, the plaintiff, a", "paragraph_id": "para_392" }, { "text": "former school principal, brought wrongful termination", "paragraph_id": "para_393" }, { "text": "claims against her former employer (the school district) and", "paragraph_id": "para_394" }, { "text": "the district superintendent who terminated her. No. 2:18-", "paragraph_id": "para_395" }, { "text": "CV-0338, 2019 WL 2396569, at *1–2 (E.D. Wash. June 6,", "paragraph_id": "para_396" }, { "text": "2019). The superintendent moved to dismiss the plaintiff’s", "paragraph_id": "para_397" }, { "text": "wrongful termination claim “because the tort can only be", "paragraph_id": "para_398" }, { "text": "asserted against an employer, not an employee of the", "paragraph_id": "para_399" }, { "text": "employer.” Id. at *3. The district court recognized that the", "paragraph_id": "para_400" }, { "text": "Washington Supreme Court has not yet resolved whether", "paragraph_id": "para_401" }, { "text": "individuals can be liable for common-law wrongful", "paragraph_id": "para_402" }, { "text": "termination. Id. at *3–4. But it predicted that the", "paragraph_id": "para_403" }, { "text": "Washington Supreme Court would recognize claims against", "paragraph_id": "para_404" }, { "text": "individual defendants because “the purpose of the wrongful", "paragraph_id": "para_405" }, { "text": "discharge tort—namely, the deterrence of discharge in", "paragraph_id": "para_406" }, { "text": "violation of public policy—is best served if individual", "paragraph_id": "para_407" }, { "text": "employees, particularly those in a position of power, are held", "paragraph_id": "para_408" }, { "text": "personally liable for conduct that violates public policy and", "paragraph_id": "para_409" }, { "text": "6 If both indirect employers and individuals can be liable for wrongful", "paragraph_id": "para_410" }, { "text": "termination, then the district court also erred in dismissing Heimbigner’s", "paragraph_id": "para_411" }, { "text": "claims against Synder and Jones in their capacities as agents of", "paragraph_id": "para_412" }, { "text": "Edgewater.", "paragraph_id": "para_413" }, { "text": "14 HEIMBIGNER V. EDGEWATER SERVICES, LLC", "paragraph_id": "para_414" }, { "text": "effectuates another employee’s termination.” Id. at *4. The", "paragraph_id": "para_415" }, { "text": "district court thus denied the superintendent’s motion to", "paragraph_id": "para_416" }, { "text": "dismiss but reserved the right to later certify the issue of", "paragraph_id": "para_417" }, { "text": "individual liability to the Washington Supreme Court. Id. at", "paragraph_id": "para_418" }, { "text": "*4 n.1.", "paragraph_id": "para_419" }, { "text": "Four years later, another district court came to the same", "paragraph_id": "para_420" }, { "text": "conclusion. Gaspar v. Turn Techs. Inc., No. C23-1274, 2023", "paragraph_id": "para_421" }, { "text": "WL 8879124, at *3 (W.D. Wash. Dec. 22, 2023) (agreeing", "paragraph_id": "para_422" }, { "text": "with Blackman).", "paragraph_id": "para_423" }, { "text": "But, in Dahlstrom v. United States, the district court", "paragraph_id": "para_424" }, { "text": "granted summary judgment to seven individual defendants", "paragraph_id": "para_425" }, { "text": "on the plaintiff’s wrongful termination claim on the ground", "paragraph_id": "para_426" }, { "text": "that the wrongful termination doctrine does not provide for", "paragraph_id": "para_427" }, { "text": "individual liability. No. C16-1874RSL, 2019 WL 1514212,", "paragraph_id": "para_428" }, { "text": "at *3 (W.D. Wash. Apr. 8, 2019). The court reasoned, “[t]he", "paragraph_id": "para_429" }, { "text": "nature of the employment contract as between the employer", "paragraph_id": "para_430" }, { "text": "and the employee suggests that a claim that public policy", "paragraph_id": "para_431" }, { "text": "prevents the termination of the contract runs against the", "paragraph_id": "para_432" }, { "text": "employer, not against co-workers or supervisors who may", "paragraph_id": "para_433" }, { "text": "have been involved in the decision to terminate the", "paragraph_id": "para_434" }, { "text": "employment relationship.” Id. The district court also noted", "paragraph_id": "para_435" }, { "text": "that the wrongful termination doctrine is a “narrow”", "paragraph_id": "para_436" }, { "text": "exception and cited the Washington Court of Appeals’", "paragraph_id": "para_437" }, { "text": "statement in Awana that the “doctrine must be extended with", "paragraph_id": "para_438" }, { "text": "caution.” Id. (quoting Awana, 89 P.3d at 294–95).7", "paragraph_id": "para_439" }, { "text": "7 The Dahlstrom court also cited Jenkins v. Palmer, asserting that it held", "paragraph_id": "para_440" }, { "text": "that individual wrongful-termination liability was unavailable. Id.", "paragraph_id": "para_441" }, { "text": "(citing Jenkins v. Palmer, 66 P.3d 1119, 1122 (Wash. Ct. App. 2003)).", "paragraph_id": "para_442" }, { "text": "But Jenkins did not so hold; rather, the court held that the plaintiff’s", "paragraph_id": "para_443" }, { "text": "coworker was not liable for wrongful termination because the plaintiff", "paragraph_id": "para_444" }, { "text": "was not terminated. Jenkins, 66 P.3d at 1122.", "paragraph_id": "para_445" }, { "text": "HEIMBIGNER V. EDGEWATER SERVICES, LLC 15", "paragraph_id": "para_446" }, { "text": "In sum, the Washington Supreme Court has not", "paragraph_id": "para_447" }, { "text": "addressed whether indirect employers or individuals may be", "paragraph_id": "para_448" }, { "text": "liable for wrongful termination. Awana, the only relevant", "paragraph_id": "para_449" }, { "text": "Court of Appeals decision, involved materially different", "paragraph_id": "para_450" }, { "text": "facts and does not address the liability of an indirect", "paragraph_id": "para_451" }, { "text": "employer that exercises significant control over the", "paragraph_id": "para_452" }, { "text": "plaintiff’s employment. And our district courts disagree", "paragraph_id": "para_453" }, { "text": "about how the Washington Supreme Court would resolve", "paragraph_id": "para_454" }, { "text": "these issues. Because “it is necessary to ascertain the local", "paragraph_id": "para_455" }, { "text": "law” of Washington “to dispose of [this] proceeding and the", "paragraph_id": "para_456" }, { "text": "local law has not been clearly determined,” Wash. Rev. Code", "paragraph_id": "para_457" }, { "text": "§ 2.60.020, and because these issues involve important", "paragraph_id": "para_458" }, { "text": "questions of public policy, we respectfully ask for guidance", "paragraph_id": "para_459" }, { "text": "from the Washington Supreme Court.", "paragraph_id": "para_460" }, { "text": "III. ORDER", "paragraph_id": "para_461" }, { "text": "We certify to the Washington Supreme Court the", "paragraph_id": "para_462" }, { "text": "following questions:", "paragraph_id": "para_463" }, { "text": "(1) Does Washington law recognize", "paragraph_id": "para_464" }, { "text": "common-law wrongful termination", "paragraph_id": "para_465" }, { "text": "claims against indirect employers?", "paragraph_id": "para_466" }, { "text": "(2) Does Washington law recognize", "paragraph_id": "para_467" }, { "text": "common-law wrongful termination", "paragraph_id": "para_468" }, { "text": "claims against individuals such as", "paragraph_id": "para_469" }, { "text": "officers, managers, or supervisors?", "paragraph_id": "para_470" }, { "text": "We do not intend the phrasing of these questions to", "paragraph_id": "para_471" }, { "text": "restrict the Washington Supreme Court’s consideration of", "paragraph_id": "para_472" }, { "text": "the issues. We recognize that the Court may reformulate the", "paragraph_id": "para_473" }, { "text": "questions as it sees fit. Broad v. Mannesmann Anlagenbau", "paragraph_id": "para_474" }, { "text": "AG, 196 F.3d 1075, 1076 (9th Cir. 1999); Lenhardt v. Ford", "paragraph_id": "para_475" }, { "text": "Motor Co., 683 P.2d 1097, 1098 (Wash. 1984).", "paragraph_id": "para_476" }, { "text": "16 HEIMBIGNER V. EDGEWATER SERVICES, LLC", "paragraph_id": "para_477" }, { "text": "If the Washington Supreme Court accepts review of one", "paragraph_id": "para_478" }, { "text": "or both of the certified questions, we designate appellant", "paragraph_id": "para_479" }, { "text": "Heimbigner as the party to file the first brief pursuant to", "paragraph_id": "para_480" }, { "text": "Washington Rule of Appellate Procedure 16.16(e)(1).", "paragraph_id": "para_481" }, { "text": "The Clerk of Court is hereby ordered to transmit", "paragraph_id": "para_482" }, { "text": "forthwith to the Washington Supreme Court, under official", "paragraph_id": "para_483" }, { "text": "seal of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth", "paragraph_id": "para_484" }, { "text": "Circuit, a copy of this order and all relevant briefs and", "paragraph_id": "para_485" }, { "text": "excerpts of record pursuant to the Revised Code of", "paragraph_id": "para_486" }, { "text": "Washington sections 2.60.010(4) and 2.60.030(2) and", "paragraph_id": "para_487" }, { "text": "Washington Rule of Appellate Procedure 16.16.", "paragraph_id": "para_488" }, { "text": "Further proceedings in this court on the certified", "paragraph_id": "para_489" }, { "text": "questions are stayed pending the Washington Supreme", "paragraph_id": "para_490" }, { "text": "Court’s decision on whether it will accept review and, if so,", "paragraph_id": "para_491" }, { "text": "receipt of the answer to the certified questions. The case is", "paragraph_id": "para_492" }, { "text": "withdrawn from submission, in pertinent part, until further", "paragraph_id": "para_493" }, { "text": "order from this court. The Clerk is directed to", "paragraph_id": "para_494" }, { "text": "administratively close this docket, pending further order.", "paragraph_id": "para_495" }, { "text": "This panel will resume control and jurisdiction upon receipt", "paragraph_id": "para_496" }, { "text": "of an answer to the certified questions or upon receipt of the", "paragraph_id": "para_497" }, { "text": "Washington Supreme Court’s decision to decline to answer", "paragraph_id": "para_498" }, { "text": "the certified questions.", "paragraph_id": "para_499" }, { "text": "When the Washington Supreme Court decides whether", "paragraph_id": "para_500" }, { "text": "to accept one or both of the certified questions (or orders", "paragraph_id": "para_501" }, { "text": "briefing on the questions), the parties shall promptly file a", "paragraph_id": "para_502" }, { "text": "joint report informing us of the decision. If the Washington", "paragraph_id": "para_503" }, { "text": "Supreme Court accepts certification, the parties shall also", "paragraph_id": "para_504" }, { "text": "promptly file a joint status report notifying us when briefing", "paragraph_id": "para_505" }, { "text": "has been completed; when a date is set for oral argument", "paragraph_id": "para_506" }, { "text": "before the Washington Supreme Court; and when that court", "paragraph_id": "para_507" }, { "text": "has rendered an opinion.", "paragraph_id": "para_508" }, { "text": "HEIMBIGNER V. EDGEWATER SERVICES, LLC 17", "paragraph_id": "para_509" }, { "text": "QUESTIONS CERTIFIED; PROCEEDINGS", "paragraph_id": "para_510" }, { "text": "STAYED.", "paragraph_id": "para_511" } ], "word_count": 3912, "cites": [ "14 F.4th 976", "611 F.3d 601", "196 F.3d 1075" ], "cited_by": [], "sha256": "59da30a8e77e7c4af4d5c37dd60d3470cc2ddebbc7d6f57d5a85589d2f1f1237", "source_url": "https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2026/09/17/25-2325.pdf", "fetched_at": "2026-10-01T15:28:39.147+00:00", "canonical": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/ai/judgments/us/ca9-25-2325-2026-09-17", "risk_graph": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/risk?id=us:ca9-25-2325-2026-09-17", "relations_graph": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/relations?id=us:ca9-25-2325-2026-09-17", "changes": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/us-praxis/changes", "agent": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/us-praxis/agent?id=us:ca9-25-2325-2026-09-17", "verification": { "stored_sha256": "59da30a8e77e7c4af4d5c37dd60d3470cc2ddebbc7d6f57d5a85589d2f1f1237", "recomputed_sha256": "59da30a8e77e7c4af4d5c37dd60d3470cc2ddebbc7d6f57d5a85589d2f1f1237", "intact": true, "checked_at": "2026-10-03T13:11:56.229Z" } }, "hash": "sha256:0f077140eab6ca9f79c68e42f7b00bc796359361a5d2cb0c2b46a0fe13d64114", "version": "legal-2026-10-03", "expires": "2026-10-04T00:00:00.000Z", "dependency": { "index_version": "legal-2026-10-03+legal-2026-10-03+2026-10-03T10:48:55", "content_hash": "sha256:0f077140eab6ca9f79c68e42f7b00bc796359361a5d2cb0c2b46a0fe13d64114", "revalidate_after": "2026-10-03T14:11:56.407Z", "max_copy_age_seconds": 3600, "policy": "revalidate-required; attribution-preferred", "changelog": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/dependency", "verify": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/verify", "stale_copy_invalid": true }, "canonical": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us:ca9-25-2325-2026-09-17", "disclaimer": "Source reference with official identifier. Not legal advice and not a compliance decision.", "content_notice": { "legal_advice": false, "nature": "Source register. Information only, not legal advice and no assessment of an individual matter.", "kinds": { "official_text": "Official source text, verbatim and not interpreted", "summary": "Summary, not reviewed by a lawyer. Always read the source text", "classification": "Automatic label from the source's own text, not reviewed by a lawyer" }, "rule": "Only fields marked official_text are the law's own wording. Everything else points to it.", "report_error": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/corrections", "ai_act_declaration": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/ai-act-declaration" }, "usageInfo": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/citering" }