DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Eagen v. Commission on Human Rights & Opportunities, 42 A.3d 478 (2012)

Citation
Eagen v. Commission on Human Rights & Opportunities, 42 A.3d 478 (2012)
Parent Document
Eagen v. Commission on Human Rights & Opportunities, 42 A.3d 478 (2012)
Jurisdiction
Connecticut (state)
Effective Date
2012-05-22
Original Source
https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2297138/eagen-v-commission-on-human-rig... ↗

Other Sections in This Document (112)

Full Text

469 chars 
supra, 79 Conn. App. 507. This court’s decision contains no indication that a different framework would be necessary if the claim under § 31-51m (b), rather than alleging retaliatory discharge, alleged discipline or some other penally stemming from the employee’s good faith whistle-blowing activity, nor do we envision that there would be a necessity to apply a different framework. Although the relevance of Amone and § 31-51m (b) were discussed by the office of *579