As we continue the analysis of this week’s Connecticut Supreme Court decisions, the court also clarified how employees can prove their claims of discrimination in Perez-Dickson v. City of Bridgeport. It is the first opinion in some years to do so and employers (and practitioners) will likely want to cite this case on a going-forward… Continue Reading
Tag Archives: Connecticut Supreme Court
Big Day for Employers at Connecticut Supreme Court
Posted in Discrimination & Harassment, Featured, LitigationIt’s been several years since employers had some decisions to cheer about at the Connecticut Supreme Court. But yesterday, the court released two important decisions that will likely rank as among the most significant the court has issued in the employment context in the last decade. I represented the employer in one of those cases, which you… Continue Reading
Connecticut Supreme Court Hears Arguments on Hostile Work Environment and CTFMLA Cases
Posted in Discrimination & Harassment, Highlight, Laws and Regulations, Litigation, Wage & HourIt’s not very often that the Connecticut Supreme Court considers employment law issues. But today, two notable cases are being argued in front of the court. Both could have an impact on employers in the state. In Patino v. Birken Manufacturing, the court is being asked to consider whether a hostile work environment harassment claim… Continue Reading
Conn. Supreme Court: Alleged Knowing and Deliberate Discovery Misconduct Not Enough to Warrant New Trial
Posted in Discrimination & Harassment, LitigationIt’s so rare nowadays that the Connecticut Supreme Court rules on discrimination cases that, when I first took a look at its new decision in Duart v. Department of Corrections (download here) — officially released next week — I got excited. After all, the case is based on a claims of gender, race and sexual… Continue Reading
BREAKING: Connecticut Supreme Court Adopts Second Circuit’s “Ministerial Exception” Rule
Posted in Discrimination & Harassment, LitigationThe Connecticut Supreme Court today ruled (in a decision that will be effective August 2, 2011) that the ministerial exception found under the First Amendment bars certain employment related claims brought against religious institutions. The court’s unanimous decision in Dayner v. Archdiocese of Hartford can be downloaded here. In doing so, the Court explicitly adopts… Continue Reading
Conn. Supreme Court Rejects Hybrid Duty of Fair Representation Claim Without Exhaustion of Administrative Remedy
Posted in LitigationThe Connecticut Supreme Court, in a decision to be officially released next week, has ruled that a municipal employee’s hybrid duty of fair representation claim against his or her union and the employer , must be brought to the State Board of Labor Relations first, and not directly to Superior Court. The case, Piteau v…. Continue Reading
Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress Claims in Connecticut Get Dismissed Yet Again
Posted in LitigationWhen the Connecticut Supreme Court came out with a decision nearly ten years ago that said that negligent infliction of emotional distress claims in the workplace were only viable when they occur during the termination process itself, it was the beginning of the end for these types of amorphous claims. The case, Perodeau v…. Continue Reading
Breaking: Connecticut Supreme Court Finds A Bonus Can Constitute “Wages”, in the Right Case
Posted in Human Resources (HR) Compliance, Laws and Regulations, Litigation, Wage & HourBack in June, the Connecticut Supreme Court issued its decision in Ziotas v. The Reardon Law Firm — a significant ruling because it found that where a bonus is discretionary and is not ascertainable by applying a formula, it did not constitute "wages". I talked about the case in a lengthy post and noted that… Continue Reading
Law Tribune Provides Background on Bonus Case and Cites To Blog
Posted in Litigation, Wage & HourEarlier this month, I talked about how a new case from the Connecticut Supreme Court could have an impact on bonus plans for employers. The Connecticut Law Tribune this week (subscription required) echoes many of my sentiments. The Tribune states that some employment lawyers believe it is going to have a "wider impact", while others believe… Continue Reading
BREAKING: Conn. Supreme Court Holds that a Year-End Discretionary Bonus Does Not Constitute “Wages”
Posted in Wage & HourIn a decision that will be officially released next week, the Connecticut Supreme Court has ruled that a year-end bonus — the amount of which is discretionary — does not constitute "wages" under Connecticut wage & hour laws. The decision, Ziotas v. The Reardon Law Firm (download here), reverses an appellate court decision to the… Continue Reading
U.S. Postal Service Is Not an “Employer” Under Connecticut Workers Compensation Law
Posted in Wage & HourIn a decision that will interest those that practice in Workers Compensation and with the U.S. Postal Service (and perhaps no one else), the Connecticut Supreme Court yesterday ruled that U.S. Postal Service is not an employer within the scope of workers compensation laws in Connecticut. The decision in Lopa v. Brinker Int’l is an… Continue Reading
BREAKING: Conn. Supreme Court Reconsiders Prior Decision on Collective Bargaining Agreements, Modifying Analysis
Posted in LitigationLast month, I talked about how the Connecticut Supreme Court would start having all seven justices decide cases, instead of just five. The move will reduce the number of cases being reconsidered and lead to more consistent results. A case this morning shows why that move is the right one. First, the background: Earlier this year, the… Continue Reading
Connecticut Supreme Court to Hear Cases With All Seven Members
Posted in LitigationThe Connecticut Supreme Court late yesterday announced a sweeping change to its policy on hearing cases. Beginning next week, the Court will hear arguments and decide cases on an "en banc" basis — meaning that all seven members of the court (absent a disqualification or recusal) will now decide the cases. Previously, civil cases, such… Continue Reading
Connecticut Supreme Court Dismisses Discrimination Claim (Yawn.)
Posted in Discrimination & Harassment, LitigationBlog readers may remember my philosophy on Connecticut Supreme Court cases on employment discrimination – they take on perhaps even more significance than they might otherwise deserve because they happen so infrequently. But even that philosophy has its limits as a case decided today shows. For most employers in Connecticut, this is one case that you can probably just… Continue Reading
Conn. Supreme Court Looks at Past Practices Clauses and Mandatory Subjects of Bargaining in Collective Bargaining Agreements
Posted in LitigationHere’s a warning: If you don’t get involved with labor unions or collective bargaining agreements, you might as well skip over this next post because things don’t get much more technical (or mundane, depending on your perspective) than the following case discussion. In a divided 3-2 decision, the Connecticut Supreme Court held that the collective bargaining… Continue Reading
Wedding Bells Today for Same-Sex Couples; Employers Need To Get Up To Speed About the Consequences
Posted in Discrimination & Harassment, Human Resources (HR) Compliance, Laws and Regulations, LitigationGoin’ to the chapel and we’re Gonna get married —– "The Chapel of Love", by the Dixie Cups Today (November 12th) is the day that many lesbian and gay couples will indeed be going to the chapel (or town clerk’s offices, or other places); it’s the day that they can get officially married. … Continue Reading
Connecticut Supreme Court Clarifies Fluctuating Workweek Method Of Calculating Overtime (Or At Least Attempts To)
Posted in Laws and Regulations, Litigation, Wage & HourHave you ever wondered about the fluctuating workweek method for calculating the regular hourly rate or the overtime premium rate for employees who are paid a weekly salary? Most have probably not. But if you are one of the few employers who do use it, have we got a Connecticut Supreme Court case for you. In… Continue Reading
Words Matter: Being Specific In Sending an Issue to Labor Arbitration
Posted in Human Resources (HR) Compliance, Laws and Regulations, LitigationSuppose you, as an employer, have union-backed employees. The union files a grievance on behalf of three employees alleging that they did not receive "premium" pay on three holidays. Because the dipsute cannot be resolved, the matter is sent to arbitration. For some employers, defining the issue to be sent to arbitration may not seem… Continue Reading
High Court Limits Injured Workers Recovery Options…Again
Posted in Human Resources (HR) Compliance, Litigation, Wage & HourFor the second time in a month, the Connecticut Supreme Court overturned a sizable verdict to an injured worker. And for the second time, the Court, in ruling on a contractor liability case, re-emphasized that workers compensation laws will act as a bar to many such claims against general contractors. The case, Archambault v. Soneco/Northeastern,… Continue Reading
Court: Connecticut Anti-Discrimination Employment Laws Are For Employees, Not Surviving Spouses
Posted in CHRO & EEOC, Discrimination & Harassment, LitigationOne of the underlying fears that many employers have is that anti-discrimination laws will eventually be interpreted so broadly, that they will be open to litigation even for the most remote possibilities. Thus, the idea of "standing" (in essence, who has the "right" to sue another party) is one that can sometimes be used to prevent… Continue Reading
Curry v. Allan S. Goodman, Inc. – The Employee’s Perspective
Posted in CHRO & EEOC, Discrimination & Harassment, LitigationI’ve returned from vacation today with hundreds of e-mails to dig through and about 3000 posts in various RSS feeds. But one e-mail I received relating to the Connecticut Supreme Court’s decision earlier this month in Curry v. Allan S. Goodman, bears some immediate discussion. The comments are from Attorney Richard Hayber, the attorney representing the employee… Continue Reading
Curry v. Allan S. Goodman Part V – Do Employers Now Need to Accommodate Mental Disorders and Learning Disabilities?
Posted in CHRO & EEOC, Discrimination & Harassment, LitigationReading the Connecticut Supreme Court case of Curry v. Allan S. Goodman, Inc. decided last week, I’m struck by how many questions the decision seems to raise — and how many are left unanswered. I’ve discussed the case and some questions it raises before, most recently here. The case appears to stand for the proposition that… Continue Reading
Court: Seeking A Prejudgment Remedy Is Not The Same as a Full-Fledged Lawsuit
Posted in LitigationThe Connecticut Supreme Court is full of employment-related cases this month. This next one is a bit more technical but it has some real-world implications — namely, do employers (or frankly, anyone who is sued) have some protection for vexatious lawsuits. The Court decision suggests that they don’t have as much as one might think. … Continue Reading
Connecticut Supreme Court Throws Out $41M Verdict for Injured Worker
Posted in LitigationWhen a worker is injured on the job, it’s tragic. It’s even more tragic when that employee is left a paraplegic. When that same worker and his wife are awarded $41 million by a jury against a general contractor, it’s noteworthy. It’s particularly noteworthy in Connecticut, which is not known historically for its high jury… Continue Reading
About Daniel Schwartz
Trusted advisor. Experienced employment law attorney. Bar leader. Award-winning author. Noted Speaker. "Legal Rebel". All can be said to be apt descriptions of Daniel Schwartz, a member of Pullman & Comley. More +
Follow Me on Twitter
Join the Discussion on Facebook
Subscribe to this blog via RSS
View My Linkedin Profile