§ 46a-58

Citation: § 46a-58
Parent Document: Connecticut Judicial Branch v. Gilbert, 343 Conn. 90 (2022)
Jurisdiction: Connecticut (state)
Effective Date: 2022-04-26
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/6462677/connecticut-judicial-branch-v-gilbert/ ↗

Full Text

2,465 chars

courts. If the statutory conferral of authority were
          exclusive, as the branch contends, then only federal
          courts would have jurisdiction over Title VII claims.
          But that very argument was rejected in Yellow Freight
          System, Inc. v. Donnelly, 494 U.S. 820, 110 S. Ct. 1566,
          108 L. Ed. 2d 834 (1990), which held that state courts
          have concurrent jurisdiction over Title VII claims, not-
          withstanding the lack of any express statutory authori-
          zation in § 2000e-5 (f). See id., 823; cf. Kremer v.
          Chemical Construction Corp., 456 U.S. 461, 477, 102 S.
          Ct. 1883, 72 L. Ed. 2d 262 (1982) (‘‘our statement . . .
          that final responsibility for enforcement of Title VII is
          vested with federal courts . . . should not be read to
          imply, that by vesting final responsibility in one forum,
          Congress intended to deny finality to decisions in
          another’’ (citation omitted; footnote omitted; internal
          quotation marks omitted). The branch’s statutory argu-
          ment is, therefore, unavailing, particularly in light of the
          fact that the commission does not purport to formally
          adjudicate Title VII claims but merely to identify dis-
          criminatory practices under Title VII for purposes of
          applying state law.
            The branch’s second argument focuses on the fact
          that the EEOC itself lacks the authority to hold con-
          tested hearings to adjudicate Title VII claims and to award
          damages and attorney’s fees for violations thereof.
          Although the federal agency can investigate such claims
          and attempt to mediate settlements between the parties,
          when such informal efforts fail, formal resolution can
          be obtained only by adjudication in federal or state court.
          See 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5 (f) (2018); Fort Bend v. Davis,
              U.S.     , 139 S. Ct. 1843, 1846–47, 204 L. Ed. 2d 116
          (2019); Yellow Freight System, Inc. v. Donnelly, supra,
          494 U.S. 823. It would be anomalous, the branch posits,
          for Congress to have denied the EEOC the authority to
          formally resolve Title VII claims only to allow its state
          counterparts to, in effect, carry out that same function.
April 26, 2022             CONNECTICUT LAW JOURNAL                        Page 49

Other Sections in This Document (128)

Full Text