Last year, I talked about a First Amendment retaliation case and noted the difficulties in defending against such claims. A new case out of the federal court in Connecticut last week highlights the those difficulties even further.
In Brown v. Waterbury Board of Ed. (download here), the Plaintiff, a custodian for the Waterbury
It’s the stuff of television shows.
In the middle of trial, a plaintiff (who is claiming his employment was terminated, among other reasons, in retaliation of his exercise of FMLA rights) drops a bombshell:
[In the prior October], I learned that I had — have stage III prostate cancer with a metastatic brain lesion."
While
Nine months after a jury found his employer liable for firing a reservist called to active duty after the 9/11 attacks, a federal judge awarded Michael Serricchio over $1.3M in damages on his federal claim in a decision handed down late last week.
I
t is believed to be the largest judgment ever awarded under The Uniformed
First, a warning. 
If your eyes glaze over at discussing the difference between cash balance plans and defined benefit plans, this post is not for you. However, for those employers who are considering converting their retirement plans or who have done so, a new case released this morning provides some much-needed guidance in Connecticut about
Some commentators have argued that the federal courts are increasingly hostile to employees who bring employment discrimination claims in federal court. One study, for example, suggested that plaintiffs simply have too many obstacles to overcome in federal court.
A new study on summary judgment practices by the Federal Judicial Center suggests that such a perception may be