Dept. of Public Health v. Estrada, 349 Conn. 223 (2024)

Citation: Dept. of Public Health v. Estrada, 349 Conn. 223 (2024)
Parent Document: Dept. of Public Health v. Estrada, 349 Conn. 223 (2024)
Jurisdiction: Connecticut (state)
Effective Date: 2024-06-11
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/10131752/dept-of-public-health-v-estrada/ ↗

Full Text

2,305 chars

Dept. of Public Health v. Estrada, 211 Conn. App. 223,
226, 271 A.3d 1042 (2022). It also concluded, however,
that the trial court correctly decided that Estrada did
not make a protected whistleblower disclosure within
the meaning of § 4-61dd. See id.
Estrada began working for the department in 1995
as an epidemiologist, and, by 2010, she had been pro-
moted to epidemiologist 4. Since at least 2014, Estrada
has had performance issues at the department. Estra-
da’s supervisor, Ellen Blaschinski, downgraded her in
some categories on her 2014 performance evaluation
because she did not have a strong knowledge of the
department’s regulations and had not moved the depart-
ment’s Office of Local Health Administration (OLHA)
in the regulatory direction that was expected. Shortly
thereafter, Estrada mishandled a case involving the
removal of a local health director, which required
Blaschinski to relieve Estrada and take over the investi-
gation herself. Estrada was then placed on a perfor-
mance improvement plan.
Estrada’s responsibilities as an epidemiologist 4
included, among other things, reviewing an applicant’s
qualifications to serve as director or acting director of
health for a municipality. General Statutes (Rev. to
2015) § 19a-2002 prescribes the minimum qualifications
that a municipality’s director of health must possess.
At the time of the underlying events, that statute pro-
vided that the director of health for a municipality must
be either a licensed physician and hold a degree in
public health from an accredited institution or hold a
graduate degree in public health from an accredited
institution. General Statutes (Rev. to 2015) § 19a-200
(a). Section 19a-200 (a) also provides in relevant part:
‘‘In case of the absence or inability to act of a city, town
2
Hereinafter, all references to § 19a-200 are to the 2015 revision of the
statute.
0, 0 CONNECTICUT LAW JOURNAL Page 7

Other Sections in This Document (239)

Full Text