Mark Anderson

Mark Anderson

Direct: 206.462.6768
Email: maa@pattersonbuchanan.com
Download vcf File | Print this Page

Associate

Admitted to practice in Washington

Practice Area

Mr. Anderson’s practice is focused on labor and employment law.  Before joining Patterson Buchanan, Mr. Anderson was an Assistant Attorney General with the Washington State Office of the Attorney General.  He was with the Attorney General’s Office for nine years, during which he exclusively represented management in employment matters. 

Mr. Anderson defended employment lawsuits against state agencies and individual government managers as a member of the Torts Division’s Employment Team from 2003 until 2009.  His typical cases involved claims of discrimination, retaliation, hostile work environment, wrongful termination, and other employment related claims.  Mr. Anderson has defended employment cases in both state and federal courts.  Over his last four years with the Torts Division, Mr. Anderson was one of the top three filers of dispositive motions statewide. 

From 2000 until 2003, Mr. Anderson was with the Labor and Personnel Division of the Attorney General’s Office.  Mr. Anderson’s primary role was to provide preventative client advice on labor and employment matters.  Mr. Anderson was responsible for monthly presentations and trainings made available to human resources professionals from all agencies of Washington State government.  He also frequently defended state agencies in administrative litigation, unfair labor practice charges and grievance arbitrations.  He developed one of the best win records of attorneys in the Division.

From 1998 until 2000, Mr. Anderson was counsel for Teamsters.  During his practice as a union labor lawyer, Mr. Anderson advised union officials on labor law matters, negotiated and drafted collective bargaining agreements, and represented the union in litigation. 

In 1996, Mr. Anderson became an attorney for the Washington State House of Representatives.  In that role he advised legislators and drafted legislation. 

Education

  • Seattle University School of Law
    • Juris Doctorate, cum laude, May 1996
    • American Inns of Court Foundation
    • Moot Court Board

Admissions

  • United States District Court for the Eastern District of Washington
  • United States District Court for the Western District of Washington
  • United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Professional Memberships

  • Washington State Bar Association

Publications / Presentations / Speaking Engagements

  • Mr. Anderson has been a regular speaker and trainer at continuing legal education events within the Attorney General’s Office regarding employment law and litigation.

Representative Cases

Appellate litigation:

  • Beal v. ShotwellTrial court’s dismissal of gender discrimination and retaliation claims on summary judgment affirmed by the court of appeals.
  • Rainey v. Washington State Horse Racing CommissionTrial court’s dismissal of whistleblower retaliation claim on summary judgment affirmed by the court of appeals.
  • Black v. Department of Social and Health ServicesTrial court’s dismissal of constructive discharge claim affirmed by the court of appeals.
  • Whitehead v. Department of Social and Health Services – Trial court’s dismissal of sexual harassment claim affirmed by the court of appeals.

Trials:

  • Gelderman v. Department of Information Services – Bench trial.  Failure to accommodate psychiatric disability claim.  (Prevailed by defense verdict.)
  • Penland v. Employment Security Department – Jury trial.  Disability discrimination, failure to accommodate and retaliation claims. (Prevailed by defense verdict.)
  • Rutherford v. LaFond – Federal jury trial.  First Amendment Free Speech retaliation claim.  (Prevailed by defense verdict.)

Summary Judgment and Dismissals:

  • Blosl v. Department of Retirement Systems – Discrimination and harassment claims.  (Prevailed by summary judgment.)
  • Emmert v. Department of Labor and Industries – Civil rights, tortious interference with business expectancy, defamation, disability discrimination, failure to accommodate, hostile work environment and age discrimination claims.  (Prevailed by summary judgment.)
  • Gustafson v. Department of Corrections – Tortious interference with business expectancy claim.  (Prevailed by summary judgment.)
  • Johnson v. Lee – Hostile work environment, race discrimination, intentional infliction of emotional distress, retaliation and constructive discharge claims.  (Prevailed by summary judgment.) 
  • Kamahoahoa v. Department of Corrections – Tortious interference with business expectancy claim.  (Prevailed by summary judgment.)
  • Loffler v. Department of Fish and Wildlife – Whistleblower retaliation claim.  (Prevailed by summary judgment.)
  • Livingston v. Wills – Title VII civil rights claims and First Amendment retaliation claim.  (Voluntarily dismissed by opposing counsel.)
  • Murphy v. Department of Labor and Industries – Hostile work environment, failure to accommodate and wrongful termination claims.  (Prevailed by summary judgment.)
  • Roper v. Department of Natural Resources – Sexual harassment/hostile work environment claim.  (Prevailed by summary judgment.)
  • Steinberger v. Department of Corrections – Failure to accommodate claim.  (Prevailed on motion to dismiss.)
  • Strider v. Department of Labor and Industries – Gender and age discrimination, constructive discharge and negligent and intentional infliction of emotional distress claims. (Voluntarily dismissed.)
  • Velmer v. Department of Social and Health Services – Discrimination based on gender, age and national origin, retaliation and hostile work environment claims.  (Prevailed by summary judgment.)
  • Wilborn v. Department of Social and Health Services – Failure to accommodate, wrongful termination, sexual harassment, retaliation, negligent and intentional infliction of emotional distress and assault and battery claims.  (Prevailed on motion to dismiss.)
  • Yap v. Department of Social and Health Services – Sexual harassment and wrongful termination claims.  (Prevailed by summary judgment.)