Doug Morrill is a trusted labor and employment litigator with experience in traditional discrimination and retaliation lawsuits in state and federal courts.  

Having spent almost twenty years as a Deputy Prosecuting Attorney in the Civil Division for Snohomish County, Doug has extensive experience advising public sector clients in labor and employment matters.  Specializing in labor litigation, Doug has a history of successful results in grievance arbitration, unfair labor practice and interest arbitration hearings, as well as in traditional employment litigation in state and federal trial and appellate courts.  He has experience advising public sector elected and appointed decision-makers, including strategizing on collective bargaining and negotiations. 

Known for being hard-working, knowledgeable and practical, Doug has particular expertise with:

Grievance arbitration.  Doug has successfully represented public sector employers in grievance proceedings, including both discipline and contract interpretation matters.  He has obtained management decisions in disputes concerning, among other things, employee disciplinary terminations, seniority, leave, and overtime.  His clients have run the gamut of public sector work, including law enforcement, public works, the assessor’s office and human services.

Unfair Labor Practices.  Doug has successfully defended public sector employers in unfair labor practice hearings and appeals before PERC and state courts.  He has won employer judgments in matters alleging unilateral change, refusal to bargain, union circumvention, and discrimination.  He has also successfully prosecuted a ULP claim against a union based on its bargaining conduct.

Employment discrimination.  Doug has successfully defended employers in lawsuits alleging discrimination, harassment, and retaliation.  He has also obtained employer judgments in matters involving employee free speech and due process claims.

Outside the office, Doug can be found coaching, playing, or otherwise watching and enjoying soccer. He played collegiately for UW and professionally for the Seattle Sounders and Vancouver.



  • Stanford University School of Law
  • University of Washington


  • Washington State Bar Association (2000)
  • United States District Court for the Western and Eastern Districts of Washington
  • United States Court of Appeal for the Ninth Circuit of the United States

Awards & Accolades

  • Professional Soccer Player, Vancouver ‘86ers and Seattle Sounders, Vancouver, BC and Seattle, Washington (1993-1997). Following collegiate soccer career at UW, played professional soccer for five years in a national league with teams across the United States and Canada.

Community Service

  • Soccer Coach, University of Washington (1996) and Washington Rush Soccer Club (2002-2021). Served as a graduate assistant coach for the UW Men’s team. Coached high-level girls’ youth select soccer for Washington Rush, a local select club based out of Everett, WA.


Representative Matters

Representative Trial Matters

  • Snohomish County Corrections Guild (“SCCG”) v. Snohomish County (Decision 13480-A, PECB, 2023). Obtained complete defense “verdict” on 11-issue ULP complaint, following 5 full days of hearing. At issue were a host of seemingly unrelated unilateral change claims, domination or assistance claims, and overall refusal to bargain claims.
  • SCCG v. Snohomish County (off-duty vacation limits arbitration) (2022). Successfully defended breach of contract claims regarding the limits of the number of deputies allowed to be off (vacation or otherwise) on given days. Impact of adverse decision could have drastically impacted the budget and operations of the Corrections Bureau.
  • SCCG v. Snohomish County (Miczek I and II arbitrations) (2019-2021). Successfully arbitrated high-stakes discipline and termination decisions of corrections deputy accused of failing to perform adequate inmate safety checks, ultimately contributing to an in-custody death of a vulnerable inmate. Matters were complicated by unique CBA provision limiting termination authority absent demonstrable “actual” harms suffered by the office, as well as the issue of a second disciplinary investigation arising just as the first disciplinary decision was being finalized.
  • SCCG v. Snohomish County (Decision 13098, PECB, 2019). Obtained favorable decision in unilateral change ULP involving the Sheriff’s Office’s implementation of the new Lexipol policy manual. Matter involved meticulous examination of multiple putative policy changes as part of determination as to whether there had been any actual change to the status quo, as well as identification and presentation of a large number of witnesses and documentary evidence.
  • Sno. Co. Deputy Sheriffs’ Assoc. v. Snohomish County (Miner arbitration) (2018). Successfully defended discipline (multiple-day suspension) of Sheriff’s patrol deputy accused of inappropriate comments (profanely denigrating a suspect and referencing that they should have been handled more aggressively) to a restaurant manager when responding to an assault at his business.
  • Koster v. Snohomish County, et al. (W.D. Wash., 2016-2017). Obtained reasonable settlement on the eve of trial in a matter involving First Amendment claims brought by the County’s former Ombudsman (and, prior to that, a former three-term member of the County Council). Plaintiff alleged he was not re-confirmed as the Ombudsman because he sent a mailer to constituents on behalf of the Freedom Foundation, attacking public employee unions. Defendants represented included three Council members, and the former County Executive. Matter settled while a strong summary judgment motion was still pending before Judge Martinez.
  • Loen v. Snohomish County (W.D. Wash. and 9th Cir., 2013-2016). Obtained summary judgment, upheld by the 9th Circuit, in matter involving claims of defamation, tortious interference, negligence, and blacklisting. Matter arose when a Sheriff’s deputy candidate was denied employment after a polygraph result and certain information was shared with hiring officials from other local law enforcement agencies, allegedly resulting in lost employment opportunities.
  • SCCG v. Snohomish County (Canda arbitration) (2014). Successfully defended termination decision of corrections deputy accused of custodial sexual misconduct. Prior to the arbitration, the Deputy had been acquitted in a criminal trial. Matter involved complex issues related to Garrity rights and 5th Amendment, evidentiary issues regarding the admissibility of former testimony, the estoppel (or other potential evidentiary) effect of the criminal verdict, as well as significant issues with witness availability and preparation.
  • Rafford v. Snohomish County (W.D. Wash. and 9th Cir., 2007-2009). Obtained summary judgment, upheld by the 9th Circuit, in an ADA Title II complaint. Plaintiff claimed the Superior Court and one of its judges failed to accommodate his hearing disability as an interested spectator in his son’s civil commitment trial.
  • Snohomish County and Snohomish County Corrections Guild (first contract interest arbitration) (2007). Obtained favorable award in contentious first-contract interest arbitration with at least 9 separate issues at-stake, including wages and insurance, but also significant operational procedures that could have had a devastating impact on the Corrections Bureau’s budget.
  • Snohomish County v. Snohomish County Corrections Guild (Decision 9607, PECB, 2006). Won ULP ruling (i.e. the employer as claimant) against the union on novel issues regarding the union’s seeking retroactive pay for a first-time contract without a Christie agreement. Ruling saved County millions of dollars over the 2005-2008 contract period, as it undercut the use of retroactive pay as a protected position heading into interest arbitration.
Jump to Page

Necessary Cookies

Necessary cookies enable core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility. You may disable these by changing your browser settings, but this may affect how the website functions.

Analytical Cookies

Analytical cookies help us improve our website by collecting and reporting information on its usage. We access and process information from these cookies at an aggregate level.