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

2,406 chars

important information . . . in order to protect the pub-
          lic tax dollar and the proper running of our govern-
          ment.’’ 45 H.R. Proc., Pt. 9, 2002 Sess., p. 2857, remarks
          of Representative James A. O’Rourke III; see Conn. Joint
          Standing Committee Hearings, Government Adminis-
          tration and Elections, Pt. 1, 2002 Sess., p. 119, remarks
          of Attorney General Richard Blumenthal (bill is ‘‘designed
          to promote law enforcement against waste and corrup-
          tion in government by providing protection for people
          who risk their careers and livelihoods to come for-
          ward’’). The legislature’s goal was to create an alterna-
          tive forum for whistleblower retaliation claims;
          accordingly, it is only a whistleblower retaliation claim
          that triggers the alternative remedy scheme under
          § 4-61dd.
             We conclude that the alternative remedies enumer-
          ated in § 4-61dd (e) (2) (A) and (3) operate indepen-
          dently, in that the filing of a grievance under § 4-61dd
          (e) (3) on a ground other than whistleblower retaliation
          is not a ground for precluding an employee from bring-
          ing a whistleblower retaliation complaint before the
          commission pursuant to § 4-61dd (e) (2) (A).
             Our holding in Dept. of Transportation v. White Oak
          Corp., supra, 287 Conn. 1, is not to the contrary. We
          held in White Oak Corp. that the waiver of sovereign
          immunity set forth in General Statutes § 4-61, which
          waives the state’s sovereign immunity with respect to
          certain claims arising under public works contracts,
          requires all existing disputed claims arising under a
          public works contract to be litigated or arbitrated in a
          single action. Id., 2–4, 6. This court reasoned that, ‘‘[i]n
          light of the ambiguous language of the statute, and
          the dearth of any extratextual evidence indicating an
          affirmative legislative intent to enact a blanket waiver
          of sovereign immunity permitting a contractor to file
          multiple actions against the state, we are constrained
          to conclude that § 4-61 waives the state’s sovereign
0, 0                   CONNECTICUT LAW JOURNAL                       Page 21

Other Sections in This Document (239)

Full Text