SEATTLE (LN) — The court on Monday affirmed a trial court’s denial of a motion to dismiss in a class action alleging that Regence BlueShield discriminated against individuals with obesity by denying coverage for related medical treatments.

Luci Solorio sued the insurer after it denied coverage for surgery to treat gastroesophageal reflux disease and a hiatal hernia, citing a policy provision that bars services intended to result in or relate to weight reduction. Solorio, who was diagnosed with obesity in 2017 and underwent a sleeve gastrectomy, owes over $0.70 million for the 2021 procedure.

The complaint alleged that Regence’s exclusion violates the Washington Law Against Discrimination (WLAD), the state insurance code, and the Consumer Protection Act. Regence argued the exclusion was authorized by state regulations and did not constitute discrimination.

The appeals court rejected the insurer’s defense, ruling that Solorio adequately alleged that the blanket exclusion discriminates against individuals with obesity, which the Washington Supreme Court has defined as a disability.

The panel noted that state regulations allowing insurers to exclude obesity treatments from actuarial value calculations do not implement the nondiscrimination statute. The court cited a separate decision, Simonton v. Wash. State Health Care Auth., to conclude that the regulatory distinction between required and optional benefits does not determine what constitutes discrimination in benefit design.

The court also held that Solorio could enforce the nondiscrimination statute through the WLAD, which requires liberal construction to protect civil rights. The panel ruled that the exclusion’s disparate impact on individuals with obesity presents a question of fact for a jury, not a legal issue for dismissal.

Additionally, the appeals court affirmed that Solorio adequately alleged claims for breach of contract and breach of the implied duty of good faith and fair dealing. The panel reasoned that violating the statutory duty not to discriminate can constitute a breach of contractual obligations under Washington law.

The case returns to King County Superior Court for further proceedings.