Section 4-61dd

Citation: Section 4-61dd
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

2,294 chars

avoid . . . absurd result[s]’’). The statute allows an
       employee to pursue both grievances alleging contrac-
       tual violations that do not implicate a whistleblower
       claim and whistleblower retaliation claims alleging
       retaliatory animus arising from the same underlying
       factual circumstances. As we have recognized, the same
       type of harm may be caused by many different motiva-
       tions. See, e.g., Graham v. Friedlander, 334 Conn. 564,
       586, 223 A.3d 796 (2020) (‘‘the fact that the one kind of
       harm caused may also be the kind of harm caused in
       a case involving the denial of [another right] does not
       mean that this kind of harm cannot be caused by
       other actions’’).
          We agree with a referee’s succinct explanation in a
       similar case: ‘‘[A]n employee is required to make an
       election not as to where to challenge the specific inci-
       dent but as to where to challenge the underlying retal-
       iatory animus . . . . The phrase ‘giving rise to such
       claim’ [in § 4-61dd (e) (3)] . . . validates an interpreta-
       tion that it is the retaliation claim that is at issue in
       § [4-61dd], not simply the specific incident.’’ (Citations
       omitted; emphasis added.) Saeedi v. Dept. of Mental
       Health & Addiction Services, WBR/OPH No. 2008-090
       (C.H.R.O. December 9, 2010) pp. 75–76, appeal dis-
       missed, Superior Court, judicial district of New Britain,
       Docket No. HHB-CV-XX-XXXXXXX-S (February 7, 2012),
       rev’d in part on other grounds sub nom. Commissioner
       of Mental Health & Addiction Services v. Saeedi, 143
       Conn. App. 839, 71 A.3d 619 (2013).
         To the extent that the language of the statute creates
       ambiguity on this point, the legislative history also sup-
       ports this interpretation. The sponsor of the 2002 amend-
       ment to § 4-61dd, which added the commission as a
       forum for the adjudication of whistleblower claims; see
       Public Acts 2002, No. 02-91, § 1; noted that the legisla-
       ture intended to ‘‘create a more favorable environment
       whereby state workers . . . feel free to bring forth
Page 20                   CONNECTICUT LAW JOURNAL                         0, 0

Other Sections in This Document (239)

Full Text