Earlier this week, my colleague Bradley Harper and I did a post our sister blog site, Employment Law Letter, on a recent Connecticut Appellate Court case discussing the level of proof needed by an employee to win a discrimination case.
If you haven’t read it yet, you can click here.
The key line in the
It’s always a little tricky to determine exactly how lower courts will apply a rule of law that develops from a U.S. Supreme Court.
Take the case of University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center v. Nassar, decided in June, which held that a “but for” standard (i.e., that an employer would not have taken
Back in 1994 (in a case Levy v. Commission on Human Rights & Opportunities, for the lawyers out there) the Appellate Court in Connecticut made a seemingly innocuous pronouncement: “We look to federal employment discrimination law for guidance in enforcing our own antidiscrimination statute.”
Why? Because back then,
The Second Circuit Court of Appeals released an unpublished decision earlier this week that should give employment law practitioners (and judges) some pause as they go to trial on discrimination claims. It should serve as a cautionary tale .jpg)
about the use of certain language in jury instructions and it provides some guidance as to where the court might