Judge OKs trial for WSU lawsuit

A sexual harassment lawsuit against Washington State University and a distinguished professor will proceed toward trial, a judge ruled recently after WSU asked him to throw out the suit.

In an opinion filed Jan. 16, Judge David Frazier dismissed one of the claims in the suit but ruled that graduate student Christina Garcia’s claim of quid pro quo sexual harassment could advance. Frazier set a tentative trial date of Sept. 10.

Garcia alleges that Bernardo Gallegos, a distinguished professor of multicultural education, made romantic advances in exchange for helping her with her education.

Gallegos has denied through his attorney any wrongdoing or inappropriate behavior.

Frazier’s opinion indicates only that there are sufficient grounds for a jury to consider the case – not that the claims themselves are founded.

“I’m pleased to see it,” said Guy Nelson, Garcia’s attorney. “Christina is entitled to her day in court.”

Defense attorneys in the case said the ruling was not unexpected. Assistant attorney general Suzanne Parisien, who’s representing the university, also noted that the judge’s opinion has not been formally entered – and the clock for a possible appeal of the decision won’t start until that happens.

“Cases of discrimination and harassment are very, very, very rarely dismissed at the summary judgment level,” she said. “So, while we were disappointed, we weren’t surprised.”

The lawsuit alleges Gallegos committed two types of sexual harassment when he invited Garcia to his candle-lit home and made an advance in February 2005 – quid pro quo harassment, in which someone seeks a sexual favor in exchange for some benefit; and hostile environment sexual harassment, in which an employer fosters or fails to prevent a harassing atmosphere.

In a written opinion, Frazier threw out Garcia’s claim of hostile environment sexual harassment, saying the incident in question was a one-time event and occurred off-campus.

But Frazier allowed the quid pro quo claim to proceed, ruling that even though Gallegos did not directly teach or supervise Garcia, he could directly influence educational benefits to her.

“We don’t agree with it,” said Gallegos’ attorney, Christine Weaver. “We don’t think she has met the burden of proof to even go forward with the case.”