Connecticut Judicial Branch v. Gilbert, 343 Conn. 90 (2022)
- Citation
- Connecticut Judicial Branch v. Gilbert, 343 Conn. 90 (2022)
- Parent Document
- Connecticut Judicial Branch v. Gilbert, 343 Conn. 90 (2022)
- Jurisdiction
- Connecticut (state)
- Effective Date
- 2022-04-26
Other Sections in This Document (128)
- Connecticut Judicial Branch v. Gilbert, 343 Conn. 90 (2022)
- Connecticut Judicial Branch v. Gilbert, 343 Conn. 90 (2022)
- Connecticut Judicial Branch v. Gilbert, 343 Conn. 90 (2022)
- Connecticut Judicial Branch v. Gilbert, 343 Conn. 90 (2022)
- Connecticut Judicial Branch v. Gilbert, 343 Conn. 90 (2022)
- Connecticut Judicial Branch v. Gilbert, 343 Conn. 90 (2022)
- Connecticut Judicial Branch v. Gilbert, 343 Conn. 90 (2022)
- Connecticut Judicial Branch v. Gilbert, 343 Conn. 90 (2022)
- Connecticut Judicial Branch v. Gilbert, 343 Conn. 90 (2022)
- Connecticut Judicial Branch v. Gilbert, 343 Conn. 90 (2022)
- Connecticut Judicial Branch v. Gilbert, 343 Conn. 90 (2022)
- Connecticut Judicial Branch v. Gilbert, 343 Conn. 90 (2022)
- Connecticut Judicial Branch v. Gilbert, 343 Conn. 90 (2022)
- Connecticut Judicial Branch v. Gilbert, 343 Conn. 90 (2022)
- Connecticut Judicial Branch v. Gilbert, 343 Conn. 90 (2022)
- Connecticut Judicial Branch v. Gilbert, 343 Conn. 90 (2022)
- Connecticut Judicial Branch v. Gilbert, 343 Conn. 90 (2022)
- Connecticut Judicial Branch v. Gilbert, 343 Conn. 90 (2022)
- Connecticut Judicial Branch v. Gilbert, 343 Conn. 90 (2022)
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
Full Text
2,635 charsthat (1) under this court’s holding in Commission on
Human Rights & Opportunities v. Truelove & Maclean,
Inc., 238 Conn. 337, 680 A.2d 1261 (1996) (Truelove),
prior to 2019,3 the commission was not authorized to
award attorney’s fees and emotional distress damages
to victims of employment discrimination under either
§ 46a-58 (a) or § 46a-60, (2) the award of prejudgment
and postjudgment interest against the state under § 46a-
86 (b) is barred by the state’s sovereign immunity, (3)
the referee’s award of emotional distress damages also
was improper because the complainant refused to pro-
vide the branch with her psychological and medical
records, allegedly in violation of the referee’s discovery
orders, and (4) the referee exceeded her legal authority
in ordering the branch to reinstate the complainant to
her position at the Danielson courthouse.4
The trial court agreed with the branch’s third and
fourth claims and, accordingly, vacated the award of
emotional distress damages and the injunction. With
respect to the first claim, the court agreed with the branch
that Truelove compels the twin conclusions that § 46a-
60 is the exclusive statutory basis for remedying state
law employment discrimination claims, and emotional
damages and attorney’s fees are unavailable for viola-
tions of § 46a-60 that occurred before 2019. But the
court also determined that those remedies nevertheless
remain available to a victim of employment discrimina-
tion seeking relief in proceedings before the commission
because violations of federal employment discrimina-
tion laws—Title VII, in particular—are cognizable under
3
In 2019, the legislature amended the Connecticut Fair Employment Prac-
tices Act to authorize the commission to award damages and attorney’s
fees, as well as equitable remedies for violations of state employment dis-
crimination law. See Public Acts 2019, No. 19-16, § 7. Accordingly, complain-
ants no longer need to establish violations of federal antidiscrimination law
to obtain such relief.
4
The branch raised additional claims of error before the trial court that
are not before us on appeal.
Page 40 CONNECTICUT LAW JOURNAL April 26, 2022