Absent clear evidence of misconduct, the Board of Review can overturn a decision to discharge.
An individual who was discharged for willful misconduct, because he allegedly refused to comply with a supervisor's reasonable request to perform work and walked away from his workstation, may not be eligible for unemployment compensation.
Absent evidence of neglect or defective workmanship, a court can find that an exclusion in a homeowner's insurance policy does not apply.
When ruling whether an amended written opinion is sufficient, a court can consider whether: (1) the author is a similar health care provider licensed by the appropriate regulatory agency; (2) the provider has training and experience in the same discipline or school of practice; and (3) the training and experience is a result of active involvement in the practice within the five years prior to the incident.
A court can find that a parent who willfully refused to take a Sober-Link test within 30 minutes of transporting the minor children is in contempt of court.
In a foreclosure case, a court can deny a bank's motion for summary judgment as a result of concern that the bank officer's affidavit in support was generic and lacked specific facts required to support the motion.
Allegations that a bank failed to mitigate damages, because it effectively denied a request to permit defendants to subdivide property and to sell two of the resulting lots, can constituted a special defense to foreclosure.
Practice Areas: Creditors’ and Debtors’ Rights
If an employer sues the alleged tortfeasor to recover for workers' compensation benefits the employer paid, and the employer fails to inform the employee about the complaint, the employee can move to intervene at any time before the employer's suit is resolved or is settled.
A court can award a prejudgment remedy, if a plaintiff establishes that probable cause exists that the plaintiff will prevail in the amount requested, taking into account defenses, counterclaims and setoffs.
To establish a prima facie case, a plaintiff must prove: (1) he belongs to a protected class; (2) he was qualified; and (3) he suffered an adverse employment action in circumstances that led to an inference of discrimination on the basis of race or religion.
In a forfeiture action, an "owner" is an individual with an ownership interest as a result of a lien, mortgage or recorded security interest, and an individual who only possesses a general, unsecured interest is not an owner.
Practice Areas: Criminal Law
A debt collection agency that is making legitimate attempts to collect a consumer's debt can request the consumer's credit reports from consumer credit reporting agencies without obtaining the consumer's permission or engaging in any direct dealings with the consumer.
As explained in the 2009 Supreme Court decision of Gambardella v. Apple Health Care, Inc., "[a]s a general rule, a qualified privilege in a defamation case may be defeated if it can be established that the holder of the privilege acted with malice in publishing the defamatory material."
Practice Areas: Labor and Employment
The plain language of Connecticut General Statutes §46b-121(b)(1) authorizes orders directed at parents whenever their children are subject to the court's jurisdiction, regardless of whether the children have been committed to or are in the custody of the petitioner.
Practice Areas: Family Law
The bar for a finding of authenticity is not high; a party proffering evidence does not have the burden to disprove all possible inconsistencies with authenticity, or here, prove beyond all doubt that text messages were what they were purported to be.
Sufficient evidence supported the finding that the state disproved the defendant's defense of premises justification beyond a reasonable doubt where the jury reasonably could conclude that the victim was not a trespasser and the defendant was the initial aggressor and used force far exceeding that of the victim or that was necessary or the altercation was over before the defendant stabbed the victim in the back while leaving the apartment.
Practice Areas: Criminal Law
Connecticut's appellate courts have rejected first amendment challenges to the harassment statute, Connecticut General Statutes §53a-183(a)(2), upholding the statute when it was applied to conduct rather than speech and in State v. Moulton, the 2013 Supreme Court concluded that §53a-183(a) may be constitutionally applied to speech if the content of that speech rises to the level of a true threat, which is unprotected by the first amendment.
The well-established rule is that an exercise of an option to purchase real estate must be unequivocal, unconditional and in exact accord with the terms of the option.
Trial courts are not required to declare a mistrial when a jury has deliberated for a certain number of days without reaching a verdict, nor are they always required to declare a mistrial when a juror engages in misconduct.
An attorney who allegedly does not comply with ethical rules that govern the termination of a relationship with a client can be ordered to take a continuing education class in legal ethics.
An attorney who allegedly informs a client that she has waived charges for e-mails and telephone calls and then changes her mind and bills the client for e-mails and telephone calls engages in misrepresentation, in violation of Rule 8.4(3) of the Rules of Professional Conduct.
An attorney who allegedly fails to take reasonable remedial measures, including disclosure to the tribunal that a client violated no-contact orders, can violate Rule 3.3(b) of the Rules of Professional Conduct.
In the 2010 decision of Ciarlelli v. Hamden, the Supreme Court concluded that "the one year limitation period for claims under [the Heart and Hypertension Act, Connecticut General Statutes] §7-433c begins to run only when an employee is informed by a medical professional that he or she has been diagnosed with hypertension."
A municipality is not required to provide workers with paid personal days, unless the parties negotiate and agree to add that to the collective bargaining contract.
Performance of a particular task twice over 25 years may be insufficient to establish a past practice.
A court can find that a restrictive covenant that applied to a discount department store for a minimum of 20 years expired, after the discount department store vacated the premises.
Practice Areas: Residential and Commercial Real Estate
To prevail on a request for a prejudgment remedy, an attorney must establish probable cause exists that she will prevail on the merits in the amount of the prejudgment remedy requested, taking into account any defenses, counterclaims or set-offs.
An individual who purchases property and agrees to honor the previous owner's agreement that an elderly relative "may remain in residence at the property until his death" may not evict the elderly relative's roommates.
A taxicab driver who suffers from a mental disability, because he is scared of dogs, and who refuses to transport the service dog of a disabled individual, is unable to perform an "essential job function" and is not entitled to a reasonable accommodation.
A court can deny a request for a protective order, on the basis that defendants moved to another country, if defendants possessed the option to proceed with a deposition in Connecticut before their departure.
A female who, along with male co-workers, alleges that one agency pays similarly situated workers less than another agency may not possess a prima facie Title VII claim based on membership in a protected class.
Allegations that a worker relied on an employer's written offer of employment and did not look for work elsewhere can be insufficient to allege injury as a result of reliance, for purposes of a promissory estoppel claim.
A CUTPA counterclaim that alleges vexatious litigation cannot be brought in the same copyright infringement action as that which the defendant claims is vexatious.
A plaintiff who files an offer to settle that is not accepted can be entitled to offer-of-compromise interest, if the amount awarded is greater than the amount offered, pursuant to Connecticut General Statutes §52-192a(c).
A court can order an employer to disclose to an account executive the disciplinary records of a supervisor who was managed by the same district manager.
Federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration regulations are intended to benefit specifically designated employees and created no duty at all, discretionary or ministerial, to a nonemployee plaintiff allegedly injured at a town dump.
Practice Areas: Torts
In the 2003 decision of Hatt v. Burlington Coat Factory, the Supreme Court construed Connecticut General Statutes §31-349 and held that apportionment is inappropriate in cases involving a separate and distinct second injury, and the insurer at the time of the second injury retains sole liability for the second injury, and nothing in §31-349 nor Hatt makes an exception for cases in which the first injury is much more serious than the second injury.
In the 1923 case of Hayward v. Plant, the Supreme Court set forth factors for the trial court to consider when ruling on the reasonableness of fees awarded to an executor, such as: the estate's size, responsibilities involved, character of the work required, difficulties encountered, results achieved, manner and promptitude in settling the estate, time and service required and other relevant circumstances.
It is within the province of the trial court to resolve conflicts in the evidence and, here, the trial court could have credited the testimony of the plaintiff who served as the defendant's company's bookkeeper that the defendant's financial affidavit understated his income figure.
Practice Areas: Family Law
The admission of a child's videotaped statements under an established hearsay exception impacts the analysis as to whether good cause has been established and, because the minor's statements were admitted into evidence under the medical treatment exception, the admission of the video recording did not violate the defendant's right to due process under the 14th Amendment to the federal constitution.
The operator of a motor vehicle involved in an accident that causes damage to another vehicle, however slight, is required by Connecticut General Statutes §14-224(b) to provide the information listed in the statute, including his name, address and operator's license number and registration number.
Practice Areas: Criminal Law
Persons who serve on juries must have sufficient language skills to understand the proceedings and resolve the factual issues presented at trial; nevertheless, the test of juror eligibility should not be so exacting as to deny citizens their civil right to serve on a jury.
In finding that trial counsel had an obligation to provide advice regarding a plea offer in the 2014 case of Barlow v. Commissioner of Correction, the Appellate Court explained, that "[c]ounsel should not make the decision for the defendant or in any way pressure the defendant to accept or reject the offer, but counsel should give the defendant his or her professional advice on the best course of action given the facts of the particular case and the potential exposure."
Practice Areas: Criminal Law
The foreclosure committee lacked the authority to force tenants to permit an inspection of the apartment units, and the trial court did not abuse its discretion in granting the committee's motion to approve the foreclosure sale despite the lack of such an inspection.
Practice Areas: Creditors’ and Debtors’ Rights
The doctrine of apparent authority is inapplicable in the context of a municipal contract.
Connecticut General Statutes §46a-60(b)(1)(C) excludes older firefighters from the protections against age discrimination provided by C.G.S. §46a-60(a).
A female worker who allegedly is constructively discharged as a result of sexual discrimination and harassment can be entitled to back pay.
A collective bargaining contract can provide that employees with 35 years of credited service are not required to continue to contribute to a pension.
Practice Areas: Administrative Law , Alternative Dispute Resolution , Arbitration (ADR) , Labor and Employment , Labor Law , Collective Bargaining Agreements , Employee Benefits , Pensions and Other Retirement Benefits
A grievance that is filed 30 months after an officer's date of hire and that alleges that the cop should have received credit for his prior experience as a police officer at the time of hire is not filed timely.
A municipality can possess just cause to suspend a police officer who allegedly uses an ethnic slur.
Although go-kart racing can pose considerable risks to participants, it does not qualify as an "ultrahazardous activity," because in most cases the participants can minimize the risk, if they use due care.
A court can find that a hospital that allegedly did not provide any warning signs to indicate that the surface of a walkway was uneven had constructive notice of the defect and was negligent.
A pizza worker who allegedly violates a pizzeria's company policy about paying for pizzas when off duty may not be entitled to unemployment benefits.
A court can award buyers the amount to replace a missing French door and reasonable use-and-occupancy payment, because the seller became sick and did not immediately vacate the premises.
An equestrian homeowners' association may not be able to enforce an unwritten rule that owners are not allowed to remove, replace, alter or add trees or build a fence in a buffer zone.
Evidence that a supervisor informed a new worker that the company president was "nuts," that the employer was not good to employees and that the supervisor was required to be a "bitch" can constitute a legitimate, nondiscriminatory rationale for discharge.
Even if the parties likely would have provided post-majority education support to their eldest child, if the marriage had remained intact, a court can deny a request that the parties each pay half, if the parties cannot afford to pay.
A court can strictly construe a waiver of sovereign immunity to permit a plaintiff only to sue the State of Connecticut, as opposed to a state university.
A Connecticut court may not possess jurisdiction to decide whether a Massachusetts policy covered a Massachusetts motor-vehicle accident that allegedly took place when a tractor trailer rear-ended the decedent's motor vehicle.
A court may consider the size of the administrative record, whether the same attorney represented the claimant during the administrative process and the complexity of the legal issues when it awards attorney fees to a successful applicant.
Absent allegations that defendant specifically intended its customers to infringe on plaintiff's patents and knew that customers engaged in infringement, a plaintiff may not allege a claim for active inducement of patent infringement.
A statute of limitations can begin to run on the date that the alleged wrongful act or omission takes place, as opposed to the date that defendant indicated it was not responsible for the loss.
The 2nd Circuit has allowed litigants to proceed anonymously to protect the identity of a minor child, to protect an innocent third party from physical or psychological retaliation or to litigate personal issues such as birth control, abortion and sexual orientation.
A former employee may not be able to package untimely discrimination claims with subsequent timely claims, pursuant to a "pattern or practice" theory of employment discrimination, because that theory is not available to "private, non-class plaintiffs."
Provisions in the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. §1101, bar aliens from lawful readmission to this country following their conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude, and a conviction of threatening in the second degree necessarily involves the type of conduct and mental state characteristic of crimes involving moral turpitude.
As U.S. Supreme Court precedent establishes, including in its 2006 decision in Ledbetter v. Lantz, "while the failure to advance an established legal theory may result in ineffective assistance of counsel under [its 1984 decision in Strickland v. Washington], the failure to advance a novel theory never will."
A habeas petitioner cannot establish that the habeas court abused its discretion in denying certification on issues that were not raised in the petition for certification to appeal.
Connecticut has a clear, well-defined and dominant public policy of protecting patients from detrimental acts by emergency medical services personnel; however, that policy was not violated by an arbitration award reinstating an ambulance driver terminated for conducting a crew swap with a patient in the vehicle during a non-emergency call.