Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Li Li v. Canberra Industries, 39 A.3d 789 (2012)

Citation
Li Li v. Canberra Industries, 39 A.3d 789 (2012)
Parent Document
Li Li v. Canberra Industries, 39 A.3d 789 (2012)
Jurisdiction
Connecticut (state)
Effective Date
2012-03-27

Other Sections in This Document (51)

Full Text

602 chars
The plaintiff claims that a genuine issue of material fact existed as to the cause of her termination of employment. She appears to argue that the court erred in concluding that the only genuine reason for her termination was poor performance. In the documents submitted in response to the defendant’s motion for summary judgment, the plaintiff submitted materials that raised a genuine factual issue regarding the reason for her discharge. A fact finder may consider the temporal proximity between the plaintiffs complaint to Schmeizl and her discharge. See Gordon v. New York City Board of Education,